Federalism and Local Politics in Russia

Local self-government in Russia 237variant of the ‘division of powers’ concept and the ‘checks and balances’principle, 53 the position of the ‘head of administration’ was introduced as alocal (‘monocratic’) chief executive in juxtaposition to the elected localcouncil.The directly elected ‘head of administration’ made its spectacular entry toRussia’s local government system when, in June 1991, Gavriil Popov andAnatoly Sobchak were elected mayors of the cities of Moscow and Leningrad,respectively. Their election was seen, at the time, as signalling a victory bydemocratic reformers over members of the Soviet elite (nomenklatura). 54The 1991 Law on LSG, bearing the handwriting of Yeltsin’s reformistcamp, followed suit and introduced the post of directly elected ‘head ofadministration’ as a centrepiece in the new post-Soviet local governmentsystem with some resemblance to a ‘local presidential system’. The firstround of direct elections of the new ‘mayors’ was scheduled to take place on1 November 1991. However, as part of his power-struggle with the (‘oldcommunist’) majority in the Supreme Soviet and in an attempt to enforce hispolicy of ‘radical economic reforms’, Yeltsin, while retaining the mayors as‘monocratic’ local position-holders, suspended their election and, instead,appointed them, thereby turning them into local cogs of his ‘vertical power’machine. 55In the wake of Yeltsin’s power coup of October 1993, the local heads ofadministration continued to be strictly appointed ‘from above’, first, withinYeltsin’s ‘power vertical and second, under the sway of the increasinglypowerful regional governors. The 1995 Federal Law held on to the ‘monocratic’position of the head of administration, whereby it was left to the localcouncil to decide (by way of the local charter) whether the head of administrationbe elected directly by the local citizens or indirectly by the localcouncil. As a result of these provisions, for the first time in Russia’s history alarge number of mayors were directly elected. These popularly elected andself-confident local leaders were soon to pose a challenge not only to theregional governors, but also to the central government. 56The 2003 Federal Law inaugurated a significant institutional innovationby introducing the distinction between function (and possibly position) ofthe ‘head of municipality’ (glava munitsipal'novo obrazovaniya) and the ‘headof administration’ (glava administratsii) (articles 36 and 37), the latterdirecting the local administration, in a ‘chief executive’ function, on the‘single actor’ (monocratic) principle which, as was already mentioned, madeits entry into Russia’s LSG legislation in 1991.According to the 2003 Law the function of the ‘head of administration’can be filled in two ways:• Either, the ‘chief executive’ function is exercised by the ‘head of municipality’himself/herself. In case the ‘head of municipality’ resumes the‘chief executive’ function it is stipulated (mirroring some local variant of‘division of power’ concept) as a rule that he/she cannot be chairperson of