Constitutional section dedicated to local public authorities is distinguished by its character or vague and terse. A comparison with the constitutions of the countries to its counterpart sections of the former Communist countries from Central and Eastern Europe show that the current Constitution still sits badly to Romanian identification of financial resources of the local communities, to specify their rights and the fulfilment of more general purpose to relieve the administration of centralized structure.
As things stand so prove it since its inception two striking aspects. The first concerns the placement of the structure of the Constitution articles concerning local authorities. Most constitutions analyzed this subject treats in a separate section, as important as the dedicated rights or State organization. But the legislature was of another opinion. For this, the local authorities are, Furthermore, an extension of the central authorities, as a point to placing articles relevant to title III, chapter V, section 2 of the fundamental law.
Another disconcerting aspect concerns the title of the section devoted to local authorities. While in the Czech Republic, Slovenia and constitutions of Slovakia, the title chosen reflect a Community law (self-government, self-administration, autonomy), in Romania, the title "local authorities" do not put the same emphasis on autonomy. Moreover, in Slovenia and Czech Republic's autonomy is consfintita as, separately, by an article in the first chapter of the Constitution.
Progress towards the Lisbon Treaty since 1991 are, however, neindoielnice. From the 1991 Constitution lacks the distinction between decentralization and deconcentration, being only used the term decentralization, although descentralization was most often chosen solution of Romanian administration. The distinction is important and incetatenita in science adminstratiei. If decentralization represents placement of competences and responsibilities locally, descentralization of setting up institutions that assume continues to depend directly on the level of financial and decision-making. A second absence of the Constitution of 1991, corrected by the current Constitution, concerns the lack of specification of subordination between prefects as representatives of local Executive, local authorities and bodies. in his/her absence, the mere mention of local autonomy was totally insufficient for understanding how this works.
On the other side, these developments, though necessary, are far from being sufficient. most constitutions taken into consideration, the section concerning local communities focuses mainly on their rights. The same thing happens in the actual Constitution, where such rights do not occur later than than the default.
Two of these rights, to have a proper budget and the power to impose taxes and fees, are stipulated in articles 137 and 138, without being identified as rights of local communities, which the central power must comply. Another important law from a financial standpoint, to get grants, to the extent necessary to fulfill the responsibilities assigned to it by law, is not mentioned in the Constitution, but only in law 215/2001. For a real decentralization, financial resources must come mainly from own sources, not from the transportation center. in Slovakia, the community is financed, "primarily and mainly" from its own sources and only a secondary from subsidies from the Center (article. 65, the Constitution of Slovakia). The idea in the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia in article 142.
The same Law 215/2001 provides for other rights, recognized in other States at the constitutional level, such as the right of ownership, right of Association, the right to hold referendums on issues of local interest and to decide upon any changes to territorial boundaries. In the case of essential rights of local communities, they should be recognized by the Constitution, as it happens, even to some of those rights, in the Czech Republic (article. Slovakia (101), art. 165), Bulgaria (article. 136, 137, 141), Hungary (article. 44/A) and Poland (article. 167-172). In the current Constitution, the most comprehensive article on local administration, article 123, concerning the position of the Commissioner, as a representative of the Government at the county level. Through the leadership of decentralized public services throughout the County and by exercising control over the legality of acts issued by local authorities, the prefect represents the main instrument of exercising control over the Central Administration concentration. How time plays a very important role in the activities at the local level, the institution represented by prefect may aggravate the process of decentralization. Moreover, at present, few European States, including France, Italy and Poland (under the title "wojewoda"), making use of the Commissioner's function. The reduction of duties, like, for example, through recourse to the solution of decentralization against deconcentrarii, the necessary step towards increased autonomy.
The Romanian Constitution stipulates that the primary role of ensuring observance of the Law Commissioner by the local authorities, by attacking illegal acts. Two things are worth noting here. First, paragraph 5, stipulating according to which act is suspended until attacked the settlement of the case, is an excessive measure of protection against abuses by local authorities. Secondly, the Constitution focuses on the way in which the acts of local authorities may be appealed, without mentioning how the regulations may be appealed to the central authorities that affect local autonomy. Article 145 concerning the powers of the Constitutional Court does not give the possibility for representatives of local authorities to refer the matter to the Court in respect of such abuses. Representatives of local public authorities should have the right of referral (Hungary, art. 43, Czech Republic, article 1. 87), to prevent abuses to the central authorities. Through such an approach that fits perfectly in the spirit of the entire sections devoted to local authorities, the current Constitution in the competition Centre side you with local officials, while maintaining centralized reflexes of Romanian administrative tradition.