U-I-130/95 3 October 1996

D E C I S I O N

At a session held on 3 October 1996 in a procedure to review constitutionality and legality at the initiative of the Koprivnik- Gorjuše Local Community, the Constitutional Court

d e c i d e d:

1. The part of Article 6 of the Charter of the Municipality of (Official Gazette of Gorenjska, No. 5/95) which applies to the area which, with the implementation of the cited act, was no longer part of the Koprivnik-Gorjuše local community and was placed under Local Community is abrogated.

2. Until the Charter of the sets out the division between the local communities cited in the first point of the holding, the implementation of the decisions adopted by these two communities is suspended insofar as it applies to the area cited in the first point of the holding.

R e a s o n i n g:

A.

1. The initiator, the Koprivnik-Gorjuše Local Community, contests Paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Charter of the Municipality of Bohinj (hereinafter: the Charter), which determines the size of local communities in the municipality. It claims that this provision is contrary to Paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the Local Self-Government Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of , Nos. 72/93, 6/94-CCDec, 45/94-CCDec, 57/94, 14/95 and 20/96-CCDec; hereinafter: the ZLS). The initiator alleges that the contested provisions determined the local communities' borders in the Municipality of Bohinj along the borders of the cadastral municipalities, when previously, in compliance with a 1976 ordinance, they were determined along the borders of settlements. With the new territorial division of the municipality, a part of the former territory of Koprivnik-Gorjuše Local Community (the Goreljk area) became part of Srednja Vas v Bohinju Local Community. As far as the Goreljk area is concerned, the initiator states that it was commercially an important part of the local community and that from the commercial (agricultural and forestry) aspects it was linked to Koprivnik. According to the initiator, the people of Koprivnik own forests, pastures, stables, hayloft and herder's huts in Goreljk. Moreover, the new border allegedly cuts off from the initiator some houses in the village of Koprivnik so that some of Koprivnik's inhabitants now have to "regulate their affairs" in another local community.

The contested provision allegedly "altered the previously integral territory of the Koprivnik-Gorjuše Local Community" and, in addition to the changes, also "completely disregarded the will of the people of the Koprivnik-Gorjuše Local Community as existed until the enactment of the new Charter of the Municipality of Bohinj". The initiator maintains that the change should only have been enacted after a referendum had been carried out in the individual local communities.

The initiative was supplemented with a protest petition signed by 120 inhabitants of the Koprivnik- Gorjuše Local Community.

2. The Council of the Municipality of Bohinj in its reply to the initiative stated that the Charter containing the contested provision was adopted in compliance with the statute by a two- thirds majority vote. The reply makes it clear that the problem created in connection with the territory of the Koprivnik- Gorjuše Local Community was resolved with a compromise by annexing to the Gorjuše cadastral municipality the settlement of Krniški Lom with a few farms which actually belong to Koprivnik and whose owners are closely connected with Koprivnik.

B.

2

3. The contested Paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Charter specifies that the Municipality of Bohinj is divided into four local communities: , Srednja Vas v Bohinju, Stara Fužina-Studor and Koprivnik-Gorjuše. As a rule, it determines the areas of local communities along the borders of cadastral municipalities. The territory of Srednja Vas v Bohinju covers the area of the cadastral municipalities of Bohinjska Srednja Vas and Bohinjska Češnjica, and the area of Koprivnik-Gorjuše cadastral municipality covers Gorjuše and the Krniški Lom settlement.

Prior to the enactment of the Charter, the areas of Koprivnik- Gorjuše and Srednja Vas v Bohinju local communities were determined with the Ordinance on the Borders of Local Communities in the Municipality of Radovljica (Official Gazette of Gorenjska, No. 13/76), along the borders of settlements, and as a result the disputed area of Goreljk was part of Koprivnik-Gorjuše.

4. The ZLS, in Paragraph 1 of Article 18, provides that the division of a municipal territory into local, village and quarter communities is in compliance with the municipal charter if it is justified for environmental, historical, administrative, economic or cultural reasons and if it is in the interest of the people inhabiting that part of the municipality.

Paragraph 2 of this Article provides that the interest of the inhabitants in the formation of quarter communities is to be established at the assemblies of local inhabitants.

5. In the matter under deliberation the municipal council, in its Charter, preserved the local communities that were previously functioning in the area of the new municipality of Bohinj.

However, it chose to determine the borders of local communities along the borders of cadastral municipalities and this led to territorial changes. In the reply to the initiative, the municipal council did not supply any arguments that would justify such border changes by applying the reasons cited in Paragraph 1 of Article 18. The environmental, historical, administrative and economic circumstances would support the preservation of the old borders of the Koprivnik-Gorjuše and Srednja Vas v Bohinju local communities. The information contained in the 1937 local lexicon of the Drava Banate on pages 532 and 533 shows that even back then the area of Goreljk was associated with Koprivnik and Gorjuše. The fact that the borders of the local communities based on the settlement borders were determined in 1976 and were not changed until the implementation of the Charter is an important historical argument for the preservation of the old borders.

6. When determining the borders the municipal council should have taken into account the criteria set out in Paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the ZLS. Any border changes may only be made under the condition that they are justified by environmental, historical, administrative and economic reasons. From the reply to the initiative it is clear that the municipal council did not concern itself with such reasons. It paid no attention to the interests of the inhabitants of the individual local communities affected either. The ZLS does not specify the manner or the procedure for establishing such interest, so a municipal council can choose any method. The interest of the people should have been established, at least at the consultative assemblies of the local inhabitants. Interest established in this manner is not absolutely binding upon the municipal council (especially when the interests of the people of the affected communities are contradictory), but it should nevertheless have been established and taken into account by the municipal council, unless good reasons dictated otherwise.

7. Since the criteria under Paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the ZLS were not adhered to in the determination of the Koprivnik-Gorjuše local community borders, the Constitutional Court abrogated Article 6 of the Charter, but only in the part that applies to the disputed area. Completely abrogating the part of Article 6 that applies to the Koprivnik-Gorjuše and Srednja Vas pri Bohinju local communities would mean that the two communities would lose their legal basis for existence. Hence, the abrogation only applies to the disputed area. Pursuant to Paragraph 2 of Article 40 of the Constitutional Court Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 15/94 - hereinafter: the ZUstS), in the second part of the holding the Constitutional Court also determined the manner in which the Decision is to be implemented. The suspension of the implementation of all decisions made by the Koprivnik-Gorjuše and Srednja Vas v Bohinju local communities insofar as they apply to the affected area is valid until the municipal council amends the Charter so as to determine the territory of both local communities in compliance with the statute. 3

C.

The Constitutional Court made this Decision on the basis of Article 21, Paragraph 2 of Article 40 and Paragraph 1 of Article 45 of the Constitutional Court Act, at a session composed as follows: Dr. Tone Jerovšek, President, and judges Dr. Peter Jambrek, mag. Matevž Krivic, mag. Janez Snoj, Dr. Janez Šinkovec, Dr. Lovro Šturm, Franc Testen and Dr. Boštjan M. Zupančič. The Decision was passed by six votes to two. Judges Jambrek and Šturm voted against. Judge Jambrek gave a dissenting opinion; judge Krivec, a concurring opinion.

President of the Constitutional Court: Dr. Tone Jerovšek