A Comparative Study of the Laws of Administrative Divisions in Islamic Republic of Iran and Republic of Indonesia

Document Type : Original Research

Author
F. S. Mirahmadi
Tehran University, Assistant Professor of Political Studies Office, Islamic Parliament Research Center Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Introduction



Introduction

Administrative divisions refer to the territorial organization of the country space in a hierarchical manner, which is formed by dividing the land into smaller units along with layers of local government. Since the present situation of administrative divisions in Iran is facing challenges that pose obstacles to the realization of sustainable development and security, and considering the emphasis of the second, fourth, and fifth development plans on reforming the administrative division system, it is necessary to properly identify the weaknesses of this law and make necessary efforts to fix them and turn them into opportunities. To this aim, it can be helpful to review the laws of other countries regarding territorial organization. The present article provides a comparative study of the administrative divisions’ laws of Iran and Indonesia and seeks an answer to the following question: according to the laws of the two countries, based on which indicators and through which processes are the political units established, and how are the responsibilities and authorities distributed among the levels of local government?



Methodology

The present study is an applied research. A descriptive-analytic method and a qualitative approach were used to compare the administrative divisions’ laws of the two countries. The research data are composed of the legal documents of two countries regarding the system of administrative divisions. The data is collected through library method.



Results and discussion

In the Iranian division system, the quantitative indicator of "population" is dominant in developing and promoting the levels of administrative divisions. Other indicators mentioned in the law (position, homogeneity, sphere of influence, etc.) have not been defined, and no standard criterion has been presented for their measurement. In the Indonesian legal system, two categories of basic and administrative requirements (indicators) have been specified for the establishment of preliminary regions which, after passing the preliminary period, change to a new political region according to the approval of the law. The basic requirements (territorial and regional capacity) are the indicators that a geographical area must possess to promote the level in the division system. The important point is that these indicators have been defined, and their measurement criteria have been specified. Placing these indicators together, a diverse and multi-dimensional set of features is created that a geographical region must possess to be promoted in the division system. The outcome of these features is that a new administrative unit is developed when it has the necessary capabilities for self-reliance. Administrative requirements are, in fact, the prerequisite for starting the process of considering the creation of a political unit in the Indonesian government and parliaments. It shows that one of the indicators required for establishing new administrative units is a serious request on the part of the people, which is approved by the local parliament, the mayor/regent, the provincial parliament, and the governor.

The law of Iran has deferred any abstraction, annexation, conversion, creation, and integration, as well as determining and changing the center and the name of the units of administrative divisions, except for the province, to the proposal of the Ministry of Interior and the approval of the Cabinet of Ministers. The process of establishing political units in Iran is a top-down process. The law does not specify anything about the different stages of this process. In Indonesia, however, provinces and cities/regencies are established by passing laws. Also, any changes in the borders of the regions are regulated by law. Nevertheless, the change in the name of the region, the naming and renaming of a part of the land, the transfer of the capital, and the renaming of the capital are determined by government regulations. The characteristic feature of the Indonesian legal system in this regard is that prior to passing any law about establishing a political unit, a preliminary area must first be created for a trial period (three years) according to government regulation. During this preliminary period, the prerequisites for establishing a new province and regency/city should be provided (e.g., infrastructures, human resources, etc.). During this three-year preliminary period, the government evaluates the status of the preliminary region, and if approved, the new political unit is established according to the law by presenting a bill to the parliament. The law describes the process of creating a new preliminary region at the level of the province, the central government, and the parliaments step by step until the law is approved for establishing a new province or regency/municipality.

Iranian Law of Administrative Divisions adopts a place-oriented approach to political divisions. In other words, the law focuses on the way the land is divided without providing a description of how to manage the division levels. The mentioned law lacks provisions regarding the separation of national affairs from local ones, the responsibilities and authorities of divisional levels, coordination and communication with the central government, etc. In contrast, the Indonesian law of regional government has a space-oriented approach. In this law, regions are viewed as a geographical space with all its contents and relationships. The discussion of establishing new administrative units constitutes only one chapter of the law, and the rest of the law is a detailed description of how national affairs are separated from regional and local ones, the responsibilities and authorities of the central and regional levels, and other issues related to the management of political units, including regional finance, structure and organization, and performance monitoring.



Conclusion

The Indonesian law of regional government has some features that have negative consequences for this country; for instance, the bottom-up process of establishing political units has led to the uncontrolled proliferation of political units, resulting in spatial fragmentation, which has negative developmental consequences, and its pure imitation is not recommended. However, reviewing this law reveals that in order to reform the administrative divisions system of Iran through the approaches taken by laws of the fourth (Article (73)), fifth (Article (186)), and seventh (Article (105)) five-year development plans of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is necessary to amend the Iranian Law of Administrative Divisions so that first, the levels of administrative divisions, including the position of the city in the division system, indicators for establishing political units, and the process of creating political units are revised. Second, it should clearly divide the responsibilities and authorities between the central government and the local government levels, including municipalities. As a result, such a law must necessarily include how to choose/ appoint heads and managers of local governments, responsibilities and authorities of all levels of government, structure, and organization of local governments, how to finance the tasks delegated to local governments, how the central government supervises local governments, etc. Definitely, drafting a comprehensive bill on administrative divisions through such an approach, representing decentralized governance from an administrative and financial point of view, requires revising and merging the laws on definitions and regulations of administrative divisions, the municipal law, the law of city and village Islamic councils, and other relevant laws as of a comprehensive law. Such a law will provide a comprehensive and transparent picture of regional and local governance and, in fact, the way the provinces and their subordinate levels are governed.

Keywords

Subjects

1. Chung Jae Ho. The evolving hierarchy of China’s local administration: tradition and change. In China's Local Administration (pp. 15-27). Routledge. 2009.
2. Bahrami Jaf Sajad, Salehabadi Reyaneh, Shivark Rahim. Assessing the role of national divisions in the implementation of land management programs in west Azerbaijan province Journal of Regional Plannig. Vol 12, No. 47. 77-94, 2022. [In Persian].
3. Ahmadipour Zahra, Romina Ebrahim & Rahnama, Mohammad Rahim. Administration Divisions role in national development Case: Iran. MJSP. VOL 15, No 2, 17-39, 2001. [In Persian]
4. Riahi, Vahid.; Afrakhteh, Hasan; Salehpour, Shamsi. Factors Affecting Inefficiency of the Country Divisions System at the Local Level (Case Study: Urmia County). International Quarterly of Geopolitics. Vol. 30, No. 59,119-147, 2020. [In Persian].
5. Kazeminia Hasan., Shiri Tahmoores; Safari Shali Reza. Pathology of the current state of country divisions in Iran by looking at the perspective document of 2025. Journal of socio-cultural changes. VOL. 18, No 68, 159-174, 2021. [In Persian].
6. Zaki, Yashar.; Mossadegh, Masood.; Amereh, Mostafa. Pathology of the issues of Iran's division of the country from a political and security perspective. Quarterly Journal Military Science and Tactics. Vol. 18, No 61,198-183 2022. [In Persian].
7. Mirhaydar, Dorreh, Rasti, Omran; Mirahmadi, Fatemehsada. The Basic Themes in Political Geography. SAMT, Tehran. 2014 [In Persian].
8. Choudhry Sujit, Stacey Richard. Decentralization in Unitary States: Constitutional Frameworks for the Arab States Region. The Center for Constitutional Transitions, International IDEA and United Nations Development Program Reports: Constitutional Design in the Middle East and North Africa (2015), 2015.
9. Fitrani Fitria, Hofman Bert, Kaiser Kai. Unity in diversity? The creation of new local governments in a decentralising Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies. Vol 41, No 1, 57-79, 2005.
10. Kovács Ilona Pálné. Governance without power? The fight of the Hungarian counties for survival. InContemporary Trends in Local Governance: Reform, Cooperation and Citizen Participation, (pp. 45-65) Springer, 2020.
11. Shan A, Sana S. The New Vision of Local Governance and the Evolving Roles of Local Government. Local Governance in Developing Countries. Washington DC, TheIBRD/The World Ban. 2006.
12. Ahmadipour, Zahra; Mirshekaran Yahya, Hourcade, Bernard. Political Organization of Space in Unitary Systems. International Quarterly of Geopolitics. Vol. 10, No. 35,176-199 2014. [In Persian].
13. Wollmann Hellmut. Devolution of public tasks between (political) decentralisation and (administrative) deconcentration–in comparative (European) perspective. Social Science Institute of Tokyo University, 2007.
14. Junaenah Inna. Model of Local Government in Indonesia: What does the 1945 Constitution Intend?. PETITA. Vol 6, No 13, 2021.
15. Silva, Nunes, and Pitanguy. Contemporary trends in local governance. Springer International Publishing; 2020.
16. Kákai László. From Financial Centralisation to Political Centralisation. The Focal Points of the Municipal Reforms from the Transition Until Present Day Hungary. Contemporary Trends in Local Governance: Reform, Cooperation and Citizen Participation. 67-86, 2020.
17. Galindo Caldés Ramon, Santasusagna Riu Albert, Tort Donada Joan. Regional Administrative Boundaries and the Building of Internal Borders in Decentralised States. The Case of Two Spanish Interregional Borders. .
18. Smoke, P. Decentralization in Indonesia. The European :union:'s Adm Multi Program. 2015.
19. Haug Michaela, Rössler Martin, Grumblies Anna-Teresa. Introduction: Contesting and reformulating centre–periphery relations in Indonesia. InRethinking power relations in Indonesia. Routledge. 2016.
20. Istania Ratri. Territorial change and conflict in Indonesia: Confronting the fear of secession. Taylor & Francis; 2022.
21. Statistical Center oF IRAN. (2023). Data and statistical information.. Retrieved on 10/11/2023 from https://www.amar.org.ir/statistical-information. [In Persian].
22. Badiee Azandehie Marjan, Mirahmadi Fatemeh Sadat. Comparative Study about Constitution of Iran and Pakistan with Respect to Basic Civil Rights and their Effects on Presentation of National Unity.Human Geography Research. Vol. 46, No 1, 151-176, 2014. [In Persian].
23. Russell, Martin. Political institutions in Indonesia: Democracy, decentralisation, diversity.2020.
24. Lewis Blane D. Decentralising to villages in Indonesia: Money (and other) mistakes. Public Administration and development. Vol 35, No 5, 347-359, 2015.
25. INC IBP. NDONESIA labor laws regulations handbooks volume 1 strategic information and basic laws. International business publications, U.W.D., USA – Indonesia. 2017.
26. Hill Hal, editor. Regional dynamics in a decentralized Indonesia. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2014.
27. Ahmadipour Zahra & Mansourian Ali. Administrative Divisions and Political Instabilities in Iran (1906-1978). International Quarterly of Geopolitics. Vol 2, No. 3, 62-89, 2005. [In Persian].
28. Hammarlund Erik. Divide and Conquer: Political Decentralization and Secessionist Suppression in Indonesia and the Philippines. Politics & Government Undergraduate Theses. Retrieved 10/12/2023 fromhttps://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/pg_theses/5. 2015.
29. Kimura Ehito. Political change and territoriality in Indonesia: Provincial proliferation. Routledge; 2013.
30. Usman Syaikhu. Regional autonomy in Indonesia: field experiences and emerging challenges. 2002.
31. Haug Michaela, Rössler Martin, Grumblies Anna-Teresa. Introduction: Contesting and reformulating centre–periphery relations in Indonesia. InRethinking power relations in Indonesia. Routledge. 2016.
32. Morrell, Elizabeth. Local Agency and Region Building in Indonesia's Periphery: Shifting the Goalposts for Development. Asian Journal of Political Science. Vol 18, No 1, 48-68, 2010.
33. Talitha, Tessa, Tommy Firman, and Delik Hudalah. Welcoming two decades of decentralization in Indonesia: a regional development perspective. Territory, Politics, Governance. Vol 8, No 5,690-708, 2020.
34. Law on Definitions and Rules of Country Divisions approved on 04/15/1362 with subsequent amendments and additions.. Retrieved on 06/07/1983 from Laws and Regulations portal of Islamic Republic of Iran: https://qavanin.ir/Law/TreeText/83309. [In Persian].
35. Executive Regulations of the Law on Definitions and Rules of Country Divisions of the Islamic Republic of Iran" approved on 14/10/1984. Retrieved on 02/11/2023 from https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/108354. [In Persian].
36. UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 23 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG PEMERINTAHAN DAERAH. Retrieved 02/010/202 from https://peraturan.go.id/files/uu23-2014bt.pdf.
37. PERATURAN PEMERINTAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 78 TAHUN 2007 TENTANG
TATA CARA PEMBENTUKAN, PENGHAPUSAN, DAN PENGGABUNGAN DAERAH. Retrieved 02/010/2023 from https://peraturan.go.id/files/pp78-2007.pdfwww.
38. Indonesia (IDN) Administrative Boundary Common Operational Database (COD-AB). Retrieved 10/12/2023 from https://data.humdata.org/dataset/cod-ab-idn.
39. Nasution Anwar. The government decentralization program in Indonesia. InCentral and local government relations in Asia 2017 Sep 29 (pp. 276-305). Edward Elgar Publishing. 2017.
Political Organizing of Space
Volume 6, Issue 4 - Serial Number 24
November 2024
Pages 39-65