Date : 1994
Editeur / Publisher : [S.l.] : [s.n.] , 1994
Type : Livre / Book
Type : Thèse / ThesisLangue / Language : français / French
Administration locale -- Contrôle de l'État
Résumé / Abstract : CETTE RECHERCHE A POUR OBJET D'EVALUER L'APPRECIATION JURISPRUDENTIELLE DE L'AUTONOMIE DES COLLECTIVITES LOCALES EN FRANCE. AFIN DE DEPASSER LA MULTIPLICITE DES CONTENTIEUX ET L'IMPRESSIONNISME DES SOLUTIONS JURISPRUDENTIELLES, UNE PREMIERE ETAPE DE CETTE ETUDE A CONSISTE A CHERCHER UN SOUBASSEMENT THEORIQUE AUX SOLUTIONS POSITIVISTES. CELUI-CI REPOSE SUR LA DEFINITION DES COLLECTIVITES COMME ETANT DES INSTITUTIONS CORPORATIVES, DE CETTE IDENTIFICATION COMME INSTITUTIONS DECOULE L'AUTONOMIE DES COLLECTIVITES. A LA DIFFERENCE DE LA DECENTRALISATION QUI ENVISAGE LES COLLECTIVITES COMME DES CONCESSIONS DE L'ETAT, LA NOTION D'AUTONOMIE ADOPTE UNE PERSPECTIVE QUI PART DE LA COLLECTIVITE LOCALE, C'EST-A-DIRE DU GROUPE HUMAIN QUI LA COMPOSE, REPRESENTE PAR DES ORGANES ELUS METTANT EN OEUVRE LES INTERETS COLLECTIFS. LE JUGE ADMINISTRATIF EN TANT QUE CONTROLEUR DE L'AUTONOMIE DES COLLECTIVITES LOCALES JOUE UN DOUBLE ROLE. EN PREMIER LIEU, IL EST REGULATEUR DES INSTITUTIONS PARCE QU'IL ARBITRE LES RELATIONS ENTRE L'ETAT ET LES COLLECTIVITES LOCALES, MAIS AUSSI PARCE QU'IL VEILLE A CE QUE LES ORGANES ELUS SOIENT EFFECTIVEMENT REPRESENTATIFS DES INTERETS DE LA COLLECTIVITE. EN SECOND LIEU, IL EST REGULATEUR DES COMPETENCES LOCALES. A TRAVERS L'ETUDE DE CES DEUX FONCTIONS, IL A FALLU ISOLER LES JURISPRUDENCES QUI METTENT EN JEU L'AUTONOMIE DES COLLECTIVITES LOCALES ET EVALUER SI LE JUGE EST PROTECTEUR OU TUTEURS DES COLLECTIVITES LOCALES.
Résumé / Abstract : THE OBJECT OF THIS DISSERTATION IS TO STUDY HOW THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE EVALUATES THE AUTONOMY OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. SO AS TO GO BEYOND THE DIVERSIFIED MASS OF LITIGATION AND THE IMPRESSIONISTIC CHARACTER OF JURISPRUDENCE, THE FIRST STAGE CONSISTS IN TRYING TO FIND A THEORETICAL BASIS TO PRAGMATIC SOLUTIONS. THE BASIS RESTS ON THE IDENTIFICATION (ACCORDING TO HAURIOU'S THEORY) OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS CORPORATE INSTITUTIONS. THE AUTONOMY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IS DERIVED FROM THIS INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTER. UNLIKE DECENTRALISATION, WHICH SEES LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS STATE CONCESSIONS, THE NOTION OF AUTONOMY CONSIDERS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS SUBJECTS AND NOT OBJECTS, I.E. IT STARTS FROM THE HUMAN GROUP REPRESENTED BY ELECTED BODIES SERVING THE COLLECTIVE INTERESTS. THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE APPREHENDS THE AUTONOMY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THROUGH TWO FOLD ROLE. FIRSTLY, HE IS THE REGULATOR OF INSTITUTIONS BECAUSE HE IS THE ARBITER BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND ALSO ON AN INFRA-INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL, BECAUSE HE SEES TO IT THAT ELECTED BODIES EFFECTIVELY REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY. SECONDLY THE JUDGE IS THE REGULATOR OF THE COMPETENCE OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. THROUGHOUT THIS STUDY OF THESE TWO FUNCTIONS RULINGS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO INSTITUTIONAL AUTONOMY HAVE BEEN ISOLATED AND BROUGHT TO LIGHT SO AS TO DECIDE WHETHER TODAY'S JUDGE IS A PROTECTOR OR A GUARDIAN OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.