Adygea Relies on Old Traditions

to Build New Self-Governments

Tatyana Polyakova

The peoples of Adygea have long-standing traditions of local self-government that survive to this day and serve to shape the new systems of local self-government showing up in the republic. While the new laws in the republic do not completely comply with those of the Russian Federation, local leaders argue that laws which are more in keeping with local tradition have more validity among the populace.

Traditional bodies, such as the Adygean mediation court, the village khases and the council of elders, are all well-known on the local level in Adygea, and they have been used successfully to defuse ethnic tensions in situations that could have escalated into conflict. These bodies are respected both by Adygean’s and Russians, who have lived together peacefully in the region for many years and rely on traditional forms of government for settling any differences.

The leaders in the Republic of Adygea argue that their own laws are better suited to the local mentality and the local situation than general laws created on the federal level. They note, for example, that the law to ensure that minorities get proportional representation in the parliament is fairer to everyone, and more conducive to ethnic peace.
Indeed, it seems logical to argue that federal laws should be flexible enough to allow republics and regions of the Russian Federation to create their own, unique legislation. Perhaps the best form for federal legislation would be framework laws, which republics could use as a guideline when making their own constitutions.

In this chapter, we will look at the system of local self-government in Adygea, paying special attention to its roots in old traditions. We will discuss the history of some of those traditions. Then we will explain the ways in which Adygea’s laws on local self-government differ from those of the Russian Federation—and outline some of the amendments that have been made to achieve at least partial harmony between the laws of the republic and the federation. In conclusion, we will argue that total harmony with federal laws is not as important as finding a system that is acceptable to the republic’s people—and meets their needs.

1. The Historical and Cultural Context

The present-day search for effective forms of local self-government in Adygea has been based from the outset on existing traditions of communal life on the level of rural and urban councils. In developing new norms for self-government to meet the changed political conditions, authorities in the republic have tried to create structures that are in line with traditional norms accepted by the majority of Adygea’s polyethnic society. Thus the legal, institutional, political and other functional characteristics of the self-government system are rooted in the old customs of the republic’s peoples.

The ideological rejection of the past and the breakdown of continuity in social development, in the course of Russia’s reforms in the 1990s, sharpened the people’s awareness of social and spiritual issues. The results of our sociological studies indicate that the acceptance of new, more universal, values and a new political culture in Adygea has been accompanied by a revival of interest in its own unique polyethnic culture. The people are more attuned to their ethnic self-identification and this is reflected in their social and political systems. Without sensitivity to the people’s mood, the introduction of new values connected with changing market relations may be received negatively. But the public consciousness can respond flexibly to external impacts if favorable conditions—political, legal, social and economic—are provided, in order to create a positive psychological climate for innovation.

Replacing the centralized management of the totalitarian regime with new forms of property and economic activity increased the difficulty of running the republic’s social and economic spheres, on all levels, including the local level. But the transition may have been less difficult in Adygea than elsewhere in the Russian Federation, because the entrepreneurial tradition is very strong, among both Adygeans and Cossacks, two of the Republic’s largest ethnic groups. It was important for the republic’s authorities that the entire population was able to adapt to the new conditions and new methods of economic activity—especially in the countryside, because Adygea is predominantly an agrarian region. To meet the needs of their population, the authorities resolved to work out their own approach towards local self-government, even if the resulting system was partly in contradiction with Russia’s Federal legislation.

2. Legal Principles and Approaches

The Republic of Adygea tried to build its system of local self-government based on considerations of expediency and effectiveness. Effective policies, especially on the local level, meant policies that worked well in practice, received public support and reflected society’s needs. The model for organizing local powers was worked out before the passage of the republic’s constitution and before passage of the federal law “On the General principles of Organizing Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation.” The basic principle underlying the republic’s system of local self-government can be formulated as follows: Power institutions are effective if there is society-state feedback—in other words, if citizens have a chance to show initiative.

The Republic of Adygea’s Constitution, passed in March 1995, affirmed the fundamental principles of the republic’s development and the legal basis of organizing and exercising state and local government. A number of constitutional laws, including the 1996 law “On the City and District Representative Assembly” and the 1998 law “On
Local Self-Government” made up the legislative basis for the functioning of local organs in the republic.

In practice, the emergent system of local self-government proved, on the whole, to be adequate to the goals of the transitional period, the conditions in the republic and the specifics of Adygea’s polyethnic society and socio-cultural peculiarities. Unlike other constituent territories of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Adygea has local state powers in its major cities and districts, instead of local self-government. The heads of the local administrations and representative assemblies in the cities and districts are elected by direct ballot. The heads of administrations are granted the power to represent Adygea’s president on their territories. Real local self-government is exercised by citizens in the villages, urban districts and other areas, by direct volition, including meetings, rallies and referenda, and through the elected organs of local self-government. These organs of local self-government may occasionally be granted state powers—and receive the financial and material allocations for exercising those powers—when they are so authorized by the heads of administration of the cities and the republic’s districts.

The chosen approaches toward local self-government emerged from the experience of the people’s self-organization and the traditions of the republic’s population, especially the largest ethnic groups, Russians and Adygeans. The system of local self-government was also shaped by pragmatic interests and goals: the need for an effective mechanism of financial, material and organizational backing of local self-government.

3. Rallies of the Citizens

Even before the creation of the legal normative basis, the heads of local-self-governments were traditionally elected at conferences and rallies of the citizens. Such rallies, which are an institution for supporting and realizing the citizens’ initiative, are held annually and have become an integral part of the society-state feedback. The rallies can provide a basis for working out means for society’s democratic control over the state power. This form of interaction between the state and society was used actively during the period of the initial build-up of Adygea’s statehood, including the republic’s presidential elections in 1992 and 1997 and the republic-wide discussion of Adygea’s draft Constitution in 1994–95.

The rallies allow for discussion of the people’s immediate problems, their daily concerns and political problems. Particular attention is paid to decisions on effective use of agricultural lands and involvement of citizens in the improvement of municipal and rural territories. For example, in 1999, participants of the rallies distributed their roles in implementing presidential decree No. 152 of Dec. 25, 1998 “On Further Reforming the Agricultural-Industrial Complex of the Republic of Adygea and Involving Small Private Farms in Agricultural Production” and the Jan. 11, 1999 ordinance of the republic’s Cabinet of Ministers “On Providing Favorable Conditions for Developing Private Farms.”

Those documents were aimed at reviving agricultural production and creating conditions for greater economic activity by small-time private farmers. Measures were taken for the growth and development of household farms and for raising the volume of their produce in order to make the republic self-sufficient in food products. In 2000, the rallies again discussed the problem of food self-sufficiency. They also raised questions about keeping the republic’s social and political stability and inter-ethnic peace and accord.

By custom, the rallies hear reports by members of the power structures on the solution of vital problems—such as gas or water supply—and they discuss ways out of emerging crises. Agricultural reform is carried out in the rallies, with special consideration being given to the wishes of the local farm producers: The former collective and state farms are preserved alongside new private farms, and efforts are made to modernize and improve the farms to meet market requirements.

The rallies provide a means for bringing up citizens’ problems and interests and a mechanism of involving people in the decision of current issues. They act as a kind of social regulator, tapping the citizens’ positive creative potential and helping them realize their vital interests, as far as the overall crisis situation permits.

4. Local Representative Organs and Administrators

In keeping with the republic’s 1997 law “On Elections to the Organs of Local Self-Administration,” elections to those organs were held in May 1998. Voters chose representatives in one-mandate districts, which use the majority system of representation, and multi-mandate districts, which are based on a proportional system, designed to ensure representation of ethnic minorities. On the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage, 151 deputies were returned to the republic’s city and district assemblies and 39 deputies were chosen for the organs of local self-government. The heads of city and district administrations and the heads of local self-government were also elected in the rural areas.

The institution of the heads of local self-government was created as a tribute to tradition, as well as out of the practical need for a means of self-organization to solve questions of local interest. Another peculiarity of the self-government system in Adygea is the institution of village and small township administrators, who are elected directly by the populace and work full- or part-time.

The process of building up the system of local self-government was accompanied by an effort to increase its effectiveness. The Constitution not only contains the seeds of further development of local self-government but also envisages ways of improving the system.

The first ever elections of urban district representative assemblies were held in December 1995, with a combination of one- and multi-mandate constituencies. The system ensured the necessary representation of an absolute majority of villages (Adygean aouls and Cossack stanitsas) and townships. The turnout of voters then was 67 percent, and in the elections of 1999, turnout was 61.67 percent.

5. Traditional Legal Institutions

The officially adopted system of local self-government is constantly influenced, directly or indirectly, by informal structures and uncontrolled factors. The questions of building such a system were solved in different ways at different stages of social development. For example, a time-honored social regulator was the mediation court. After the Caucasian war in the second half of the 19th century, local legal relations only partly followed Russia’s legislation, and otherwise depended on mediation courts. Such a court was usually made up of two mediators and one intermediary, maybe a clergyman, or in the 1920s, the chairman of the local Soviet (council). This custom of settling conflicts was preserved as an effective mechanism for keeping social, political and ethnic stability.

At present, Adygeans no longer have that court as a legal institution, but they still keep the traditional institution of mediation. The Russians, including Cossacks, who have lived for a long time as neighbors with the Adygeans, are quite willing to settle conflicts with them through the Adygean traditional forms of mediation, particularly when the culprit is Russian. In the 1990s, when some friction arose between the Cossacks and Adygeans, this type of mediation often helped to defuse tensions and avoid grave consequences.

Among the Cossacks, who make up the majority of the Russian population in Adygea, the principle of local self-government is deeply rooted in their traditional communal representation—a mechanism for balancing relations between the leaders and society that dates back to the zemstvo, local elective councils developed in the 19th century. This link between local authorities and the public, based on personal responsibility and the community’s guarantees, offered a means for cooperation in local government in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Through that institution, the common cause of state affairs became the idea for which society pledged to use “all its forces.”

The republic’s authorities have encouraged the revival of other traditional public institutions, including the people’s meetings, or khase, and the councils of elders. Adygea’s president also has such a council attached to him. In the 1990s, village khases often helped to settle conflicts and reach compromises, including in areas of inter-ethnic relations. In some areas, councils of the elders have a right of consultative vote with the local administration. A prominent role in that process is played by the the League of Peace, which unites representatives of nearly all public organizations of Adygea. Local administrations have more than once appealed to it for help, particularly when some conflicts threatened social stability.

Along with traditional elements of self-government in Adygea—including khases, the councils of the elders, the norms of common law or Muslim law, the Cossack krug (meeting) and the institution of mediation—there are also traditions of ethno-political stability. This tradition is maintained by the republic’s Constitution, which stipulates political parity in the ethnic composition of state powers, local self-government and executive organs. For instance, in the capital city of Maikop, city and district representative assemblies have a ratio of 56 percent Russian deputies to 42.6 percent Adygeans, while the local self-government organs are 58 percent Russian and 39.5 percent Adygean. It may be expected that the parity principle will continue in the future, despite the insistence by the federal government on bringing the republic’s normative acts in line with the federal legislation.

6. Legislative Collisions with the Federal Power

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation found some provisions of Adygea’s Constitution to be contrary to the Federal Constitution. In view of that decision, and in the context of the goals set by Russian President Vladimir Putin in his message to the Federal Assembly for the year 2000, the extraordinary 54th session of Adygea’s State Council-Khase, held June 16, 2000, discussed, among other things, Putin’s proposed federal bills amending the federal laws “On the General Principles of Organizing the Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation” and “On the General Principles of Organizing the Legislative (Representative) and Executive Organs of State Power in the Constituent Territories of the Russian Federation.”

The leadership of Adygea insists that it would be wrong to seek complete legal unification of all constituent territories of Russia or literal compliance of their constitutions or rules and charters with the federal constitution. On the federal level, it is better to adopt the basic principles, or “framework” laws, with looser provisions that provide room for constituent republics, territories and regions to incorporate some local peculiarities into their legislation. The process should be bilateral: While the federation’s members perfect their constitutions, the federal constitution should also be shaped and perfected, to meet the needs of the various republics and regions and the country as a whole.

One particular peculiarity that Adygean President A. Djarimov insists on is keeping the republic bilingual, and on following the principle of parity, so that the legislative and executive organs will remain in approximately equal proportions of its largest ethnic communities, Adygeans and Russians. In this sense, Adygea’s Constitution may be better than the Russian Federation’s. Although the federation is formed by ethnic-state and ethnic-territorial units, the constitutional provision of equality for all members of the federation in their relations with the federal government actually fails to give them equal status.

As to local self-government, it is necessary to work out on the federal scale a practical approach to defining the level of power on which local self-government is possible. Perhaps it is practical to limit local self-government to the level of local and township districts or committees of local self-government in the cities, because larger cities and districts are too big for their own local self-governments. Or perhaps the members of the federation should be allowed to decide that issue on their own.

7. A Reformed System of Local Power

In its 56th session on Sept. 15, 2000, the Republic of Adygea’s State Council-Khase discussed the effective organization of state power and the optimal distribution of powers among state organs for meeting the political needs of the republic. It was decided to reform the State Council-Khase, so that it consists of two chambers: the Council of the Republic and the Council of Representatives. That structure is meant to provide for better parity of forces and more mechanisms for agreement between the legislative and executive branches of power at all levels, including that of local self-government.

This parliament was designed to be formed through the legally fixed principle of parity among the republic’s various ethnic groups. The constituencies were to be organized so as to ensure parity of representation in parliament for the two major ethnic communities—Adygeans and Russians—as well as the presence of other, minor ethnic groups. The republic’s Nov. 27, 2000 law, amending and supplementing its earlier law “On Local Self-Government,” defines the representative organ of local self-government as being elective and possessing a right to represent the interests of the population of a village or a rural district, or an urban district of a city, and to pass decisions pertaining to its territory.

The new law does not mention the head of the local administration of a town or rural district. That function is still referred to the local state power instead of local self-government. The republic’s Oct. 8, 2000 law amending and supplementing its earlier law “On Elections of the Heads of Administration of a Town or a District” establishes the ways to organize and hold such elections and gives additional guarantees of the right for all citizens to run for that office and vote in that election. According to Item 5, Article 5: “A citizen of the Russian Federation and of the Republic of Adygea may be elected to the post of the head of administration of his/her town or district irrespective of sex, race, nationality, language, origin, property or administrative status, religion, convictions, membership in public associations, place of residence or other characteristics.” According to Item 11, Article 10, the same person may not be elected head of an administration for more than two terms running.

Under Article 17 of the law “On Local Self-Government,” the organs of local self-government in an urban district of a city with the status of the republic’s constituent territory are: 1) the representative organ of local self-government, which is the municipal council of deputies elected by the people of that urban district in keeping with the procedure set by the law; 2) the executive organ of local self-government, which is the administration of that district, formed in keeping with the rules of that particular municipal unit.

The organs of local self-government in a rural settlement or a rural district are: 1) the representative organ of local self-government, which is the council of that municipal unit, consisting of deputies elected by the people of that settlement or district in keeping with the procedure set by the law; 2) the executive organ of local self-government, which is the administration of a rural settlement or a rural district, formed in keeping with the rules of that particular municipal unit.

The organs of local self-government have a right to set up structural units for performing certain functions and to raise the effectiveness of their administration at the expense of the budget of their municipal territory. The rules of each municipal territory set the order of forming such structural units and define their competence and powers in solving local issues in keeping with the law.

Article 20 of the law “On Local Self-Government” defines the posts of elective heads and their deputies in all the above-mentioned units of local self-government. Under the law, these officials are responsible to their representative organs and also directly to the population. Their powers are set by the rules of their municipal territories in keeping with the republic’s laws.

In a somewhat different context, the amendments to the republic’s law “On Local Self-Government” present the institution of an administrator of a rural settlement, who forms part of a municipal unit. That administrator, working on a permanent full-time basis, is appointed by the head of the municipal territory. The candidate for that post is proposed by the representative organ of local self-government.

Article 21 of the law describes “the Formation of the Organs and Elections to the Official Posts of Local Self-Government” and describes the status and the order of forming its representative and executive organs. In particular, the representative organ is elected on the basis of universal, equal, and direct suffrage by secret ballot. The administration is formed by the head of the municipal unit who, in turn, together with his deputy, is elected by the representative organ out of its number, by secret ballot. Citizens have the right to make individual or collective appeals to the deputies, the head and his deputy and to the other organs of local self-government.

In conclusion, it should be pointed out that the effort to achieve democracy in the present conditions involves the use of a variety of self-government forms that can help realize the interests of citizens and nationalities in the political, social, economic and spiritual spheres. The creation of an effective mechanism for regulating relations in the sphere of local self-government benefits from the use of traditional social regulators, including those based on common law and the customs of nationalities populating polyethnic regions.