Public order protection in municipal area

Straipsnyje analizuojamas subjektų, atsakingų už viešosios tvarkos apsaugą savivaldybių teritorijoje, veiklos teisinis reglamentavimas, atskleidžiama policijos bei vietos savivaldos institucijų veiklos ir atsakomybės kolizija, pateikiami kompetencijos atribojimo viešosios tvarkos apsaugos srityje problemų sprendimų variantai. Autoriaus nuomone, įmanomos keturios alternatyvios viešosios tvarkos apsaugos formos savivaldybių aptarnaujamose teritorijose. Pabrėžiama, jog vietos savivaldos institucijoms turėtų būti suteikiama teisė rinktis, kokia iš analizuojamų formų efektyviausiai užtikrintų jų aptarnaujamos teritorijos gyventojų saugumo poreikius. Straipsnyje taip pat analizuojamos viešosios tvarkos apsaugos funkcijos įgyvendinimo organizacinės problemos, vertinamos viešosios tvarkos apsaugos funkcijos decentralizavimo perspektyvos. Autorius kritiškai vertina situaciją, kai viešosios tvarkos apsaugos poreikiai, kurie logiškai kildinami iš vietos gyventojų interesų, formuluojami ne šias problemas nustatančiuose savivaldos ar regionų lygmenyse, o centrinėse institucijose. Taip planuojamą saugios aplinkos strategiją, turinčią atspindėti visų Lietuvos regionų ypatumus, geriausiu atveju galima pavadinti standartizuota, atspindinčia tik siaurus šalies gyventojų interesus. Sprendžiant kilusias problemas straipsnyje pateikiami du alternatyvūs viešosios tvarkos apsaugos strategijos planavimo variantai. Ieškant atsakymų į iškeltus klausimus prieinama prie išvados, jog vietos savivaldos institucijos teisinėmis bei organizacinėmis priemonėmis turėtų būti aktyviau motyvuojamos įsitraukti į vietos gyventojų saugumo problemų sprendimą.The problems of implementation of public order protection and the perspectives of its perfection are analyzed in the article. Public order protection is presented as a paramount trend of the state activities implemented by law enforcement institutions created for that particular purpose. The problem is raised that the present system of law enforcement institutions is unable to ensure adequate protection of public order, which has undermined the feeling of public safety and has discredited the system of law enforcement institutions. Analysing the ways to satisfy the local population’s need of safety, it has been established that the system of law enforcement should be reformed orientating activities of its institutions towards the interests of the local population. In future municipalities should play an important role in the area of public order protection. The author analyses the essence and social origin of local government that acts as an institution of every democratic state, citizens’ state that is closest to the population. Legal and organizational preconditions enabling municipalities to independently exercise the function of public order protection are analyzed in the article as well. In this article the problem of the necessity to regulate legally the right of local government institutions to choose independently the form of implementing the function of public order protection on their territories is raised. The author suggests four forms of public order protection in local government area. [...] According the findings, about 69 per cent municipalities officiers militated for creating municipal public order protection services, 13 per cent – for compacting agreement between municipality and national police services and creating the services formatted from local inhabitants on the voluntary basis and only 6 per cent – for compacting agreement between municipality and private security services. The possibilities of transferring the mechanism of planning the strategy of public order protection and formulating the goals in this area to the competence of municipalities are investigated from the organizational point of view. This process would influence the development of decentralization declared by the state authorities in the area of public order protection. It means, that some state authority functions including public order protection would be delegate to municipalities authority. The author criticizes the view of planning public order protection situation in Lithuania. The public order protection demands, that naturally appeare in West European countries from local inhabitants safety interests, are formulated not in the local or the regional, but in the central authorities. So the state safety strategy unreflects all regions and municipalities safety interests. The present safety strategy is standardized and reflectes only a narrow circle of inhabin a state. There are two suggestions of public order protection strategy planning perfection