Hubungan Penyelenggaraan Pemerintah Pusat dengan Daerah By: Hana Majdina Adha 135030107111092 Hilmayadi Umar Reyhan Aldaro 135030100111078

Introduction Otonomi daerah di Indonesia masih sangat kecil jika dilihat dari perspektif internasional. Pengambilan keputusan dalam tubuh daerah otonom semata-mata didasarkan atas representative democracy dan diabaikannya participatory democracy. Fakto-faktor struktural yang melakat pada sistem pemerintahan daerah di Indonesia belum banyak dikaji.

Oleh karena itu perlu adanya analisis untuk mengatasi aspek-aspek struktural dari pemerintahan daerah yang dianut di Indonesia dan dampaknya terhadap pengembangan otonomi daerah dalam kerangka hubungan pusat dan daerah.

Chapter 1 Strategi pemerintah menurut UU No. 5 Tahun 1974 terkait model penyelenggaraan sentralisasi, dekonsentrasi dan desentralisasi yang sangat rawan bagi pengembangan otonomi daerah.

Weak pillars of democracy and accountability is also reflected in the weak position and role of Parliament dealing with KDH (Major) in the administration of local government. Structurally, equivalent to Council on Local Government container with consideration for the creation of equal copartnership both institutions to guarantee political stability.

Local Government Council (DPRD) Major (KDH) Structural conditions of local governance and decentralization needs to be analyzed more deeply through the theory of the scale exploration of the relationship between central and regional governments.

Chapter 2 In the decentralization, local autonomous located outside the central government organizational hierarchy, while the administration is deconcentration field in the organizational hierarchy of the central government.

Model of democracy according to Gerry Stoker Local government is based on the belief in the value of the spread of power and involvement in local decision making. This perpective of strength in diversity as a response to the plurality of demands. Local government is local, which can facilitate access and local communities stairs, because the government closer to the people. The spread of power is a fundamental value and consisting of local government institutions based on the elections can represent the spread of political power that abash in society.

Although many factors that drive the selection model of the local government, but the selection of structural efficiency model seems closely related to the attitude of the ruling elite against the existence of decentralization.

Chapter 3 Law No. 5 of 1974 adopted the model of structural efficiency with priority objectives of decentralization on government efficiency and integrity of the nation. Consequences have been analyzed in more detail by AF Leemans: 1. The tendency to cut the amount of the composition of the autonomous region. 2. There is a tendency to sacrifice democracy by limiting the role and participation of local people's representative institutions as institutions of control. 3. The central tendency of reluctance to submit to authority and greater discretion to the autonomous regions. 4. The tendency prioritize deconcentration rather than decentralization. 5. There is a kind of paradox.

Autonomous region (Streek and locale rechtsgemeenschappen) or mere administrative nature, everything according to the rules that will be established by law. In areas that are autonomous regional representative bodies will be held, therefore, in any area of ​​government will hinge on the basis of deliberation. Autonomous regions that need to be built at least arranged in a large area and small area.