1.5 Division and interlinkage of the political and the administrative system

The division of powers, the legislative, the executive and the judicial, generally determines the divisions and interlinkages of the political-administrative system. A constituting principle of the state government is therefore that divisions and interlinkages should not lead to corruption of these powers, neither through political nor administrative channels. Decision-making processes are regulated by rules and regulations as the conclusions of courts' are based on interpretation of positive law and consolidated judicial practice.

In municipal government the division between legislative and executive power is not that easy to follow strictly. The reason behind is that the municipalities to some extents are empowered with the authority to adopt bylaws and legally binding plans, which in itself is a lawmaking activity. At the same time their main activities are of executive character for the realization of policies and plans in addition to the implementation of building projects. The highest local authority for adopting legally binding plans and for deciding in substantial matters is as an example the same body, the Municipal Council.

The Parliament decides the division of labor between the different territorial jurisdictions: the Central Government, the County Governor, the County Municipality and the Municipality. But between these entities there are also certain possibilities for adjustments of responsibilities and duties based on ad-hoc initiatives. The main legal basis for local government is the Municipal Act. In legal requirements regarding authority, organization and responsibilities all municipalities are equal whether they are small or big, rural or urban. In principle the municipal self-determination gives rich opportunities for initiatives and rooms for actions. However this freedom to act is limited by state imposed duties and financial constraints.

In state and municipal government, whether regional or local, the public handling of matters initiated by individuals or organizations are in main administratively led. Conflicts rooted in public law between authorities and one initiator can normally not be brought to the court system before handling of the matter is ended at the highest prescribed tier of government. Another constituting principle is that the body that took the decision should not undertake the handling of appeals or complaints against this public decision. However, public bodies mandated for handling of complaints can be operating under the same authority umbrella. For instance, in municipal planning complaints against an administrative decision can be handled by the Standing Planning Committee as complaints against the conclusion of this committee can go to the Municipal Council.

The division of authority and duties between the County Municipality and the Municipality is basically working on functional principles, not on a hierarchy of tiers. The County Municipality is in main responsible for the provision of higher order public services than the Municipality, like for instance higher education, transportation and county municipal transport infrastructure as regional roads. Still in terms of responsibilities, the duties of the County Municipality are currently rather limited compared to those of the Municipality. When it comes to mandates for land use or structural planning the authority structure does not follow a hierarchy of tiers. The County Municipality represents the regional planning power. However, it does not automatically hold the power to overrule local municipal planning contradicting the county plan or county planning policies, neither to coordinate two or more unwilling municipalities if their individual plans should work against each other. In addition a superior plan in the Norwegian planning system does not automatically overrule subordinate plans. This equalizing of authority between the two municipal orders in planning matters is partly rooted in the political discussion on the division of authorities and duties between the two municipal levels, partly in the principle of municipal autonomy in which the Municipality is understood as the primary one. If the County Municipality wants to interfere with local planning against the will of local municipalities it has to raise formal objections against the local plans.

Individual interests to be represented in decisions under the public realm are in principle realized indirectly through the elections and participation of elected representatives. This applies for both divisions of government. However, this principle of indirect democracy has been challenged by arguments for the extension of rights to participate directly, particularly at local level and in detailed planning. In consequence, possibilities for public involvement should as the central level policy goes be enhanced and include individuals as well as organizations.

A particular mechanism for expressing the will of the people concerned is established for the Saami Parliament. Any public authority should give the Saami Parliament the opportunity to express its opinion in all matters within the responsibility of this parliament before final decision is taken.

Information is a key factor in government of a working democracy, whether directly or indirectly. The principle of public accessible information means that decisions taken by state or municipal government are made available upon requests. The legal possibilities for withdrawing documents from public access are limited. State government and municipal authorities should keep post case records (electronic or analogue) over sending and receiving of public matters. These records are public and available upon requests by anybody.

Also the court system is based on the principle of public accessible information. With few exceptions are the court meetings open for the public and the press. Court conclusions (sentences, judgments and decisions) are public documents.