Analele Universității din Craiova, Seria Istorie, A nul XIX, Nr. 2(26)2014 [614003]

Analele Universității din Craiova, Seria Istorie, A nul XIX, Nr. 2(26)/2014

101 ADMINISTRATIVEGTERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION OF ROMANIA
UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF NICOLAE CEAUȘESCU
Lucian Dindirică*
Abstract
The establishment of the communist regime in Romani a was a complete
rupture, an uprooting of the old frames and obvious patterns of everyday life in all its
aspects:social, economic, administrative and privat e.
In the latter report, the text presents administrat ive policies that have
produced legal effects on the national territory, e specially during the leadership of
Nicolae Ceaușescu. If initially, the first stage of romanian communism, the
administrativeOterritorial organisation of Romania will be a faithful copy of specific
organization of Russian territory, Nicolae Ceaușesc u’s rise to power coincided with a
distancing in relation to the pressure exerted by M oscow, the measures adopted by
the Romanian leader eliminate the administrative fo reign developments of our
historical evolution(abolition of regions and distr icts), restoring gradually and with
partial success, the old administrativeOterritorial paradigm: the reestablishment of
counties and municipalities, units with a long trad ition in the Romanian space.

Key words : Nicolae Ceaușescu , Communist Regime , AdministrativeQterritorial
Organization , Romania

The institution of the communist regime brought alo ng a rupture from
the past in almost every aspect of the social life and, more painfully, even
private.
The administrative organization couldn't be an exce ption. The
abandonment of the existing general framework in th e Romanian space from
almost a century and the implementation of a new on e, according to the Soviet
model, seem to be represented by one of the priorit ies of the new power, if we
think to the fastness with which the changes were m ade.
As a whole, the transformation through which the ad ministrative
organization passed, trustfully reflects the politi cal climate from Romania and
even its international attitude, especially the rep orts with Moscow. If, firstly,
the division of the country into regions and distri cts – with the absolute news
represented by the creation of an Autonomous Magyar Region – can be also
interpreted as an act of obedience for USSR, during the next decades we can

* Assistant Lecturer, Ph.D., University of Craiova, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences,
Departament of Social Sciences, no. 13, A.I. Cuza S treet, Dolj County, tel. 0040251418515,
eOmail: [anonimizat]

Analele Universității din Craiova, Seria Istorie, A nul XIX, Nr. 2(26)/2014

102 notice a gradual spacing, having as guiding moment the year 1960 and
culminating with the Soviet model and the apparent return to the Romanian
traditional model, in 1968, when the rupture from K remlin was already public.
A very important aspect to be seized is the discrep ancy between theory,
legal framework and administrative practice. Strict declaratively, the purpose of
the communism was to bring the administration as cl ose as possible to the
citizens and to make it more efficient. Juridically , this idea was meant to be
reflected in the creation of several administrative entities: localities (of various
types), districts, regions, all of these as legal p ersonalities, with own
deliberative (chosen) bodies – councils, conceived according to the Soviet
model – and own executive bodies. This represented a premiere in the
Romanian space. That is why, getting only through t he normative documents,
without following the administration functioning pr actice, we could have the
impression of a decentralization without precedent. But, in fact, the hierarchy
was very narrow, the administrative units had a dec ision freedom extremely
reduced, being submitted to a very strict control f rom the center.
Despite the statements, the real purpose wasn't to decentralize – so to
democratize – but, on the contrary, to establish a more rigorous hierarchy. It
seemed that, in epoch, through rationalization one would have understood the
rigorous exercise of the control from the center on the entire territory, of all
bodies and of all its actions.
Herewith, we shouldn't ignore the fact that the bod ies of local
administration were always under the authority de facto – and sometimes even
jure – of party bodies. Therefore, the situation was bi zarre, each body being
submitted to a double control: of the corresponding party body and of the
superior administrative body.
Another aspect we shall take into account is the di fficulty to institute a
satisfying administrative organization, even under the conditions of a
totalitarian regime, which could institute it in a discretionary way. Several
changes from the '50O'60s prove that the regime, al though it could do anything,
didn't know what to do. Romanian administration was in a permanent
transformation, this being, as a matter of fact, th e only similitude with the epoch
of constitutional monarchy.
The decisive action of Nicolae Ceaușescu, from 1968 , with return to the
ancient organization in counties, shall be understo od in the wide context of its
internal and international policy. The abandonment of the Soviet model
represented, first of all, except the spacing from Moscow and an internal
liberalization form. But, in time, as the regime be came more frozen, within the
administrative framework of '70O'80s, the practices from the '50O'60s were
noticed.

Analele Universității din Craiova, Seria Istorie, A nul XIX, Nr. 2(26)/2014

103 The communist regime destroyed the fragile Romanian administrative
tradition without putting anything in its place. It didn't succeed to impose a
functional model. The fact that the administration functioned is explained
through the authority practices of the regime, not through the coherence of the
organization model. Once fallen the strong hand whi ch held it tight, the
Romanian administration entered in a disorder statu s, being needed more than
two decades of searching in order to remedy the sit uation.
The “premature” disappearance of Stalin and the int ernal fights for the
appointment of his descendant (the winer was Nikita Sergheevici Hrușciov)
produced, in domino system, reactions and troubles in all European SouthOEast
States under the Moscow control. Hrușciov, in war w ith Stalin's heritage,
prefers to unmask the atrocities of the regime so p resenting himself in a
favorable, providential light, attacking all the fi gures imposed and supported by
Stalin in different functions, not only inside USSR , but also at the level of the
communist parties managed by faithful men of the de funct leader. This thing
was obvious once with the destalinization start giv en after the presentation of
the Secret Report of Hrușciov at the 20 th Congress of the Communist Party
from the Soviet Union. Feeling himself aimed by the roller of changes from
Moscow, Gheorghe GheorghiuODej reorientates himself towards the Occident,
aiming a consolidation of his internal position. Af ter the unsuccessful
revolution from Hungary, in 1958, enjoying the “pre stige obtained in the eyes
of Hrușciov”, the Romanian leader succeeded the ret irement of Soviet troops
stationed from Romania 1.
The ChinoOSoviet divergences, the escalation of ten sions between USSR
and China and the positioning of Romania as mediato r, allowed our country to
show its independence inside the communist block wi thout repercussions from
outside. Known in historiography as “The statement from April”, this claimed
that any communist party couldn't impose to another “its model and that the
relationships between the communist countries shall be based on the respect of
the independence and on the nonOinterference in the internal affairs” 2.
The distance from Moscow policy and the ideological changes also
forced the change of the constitutional framework a nd its adaptation to the new
political realities.
The Great National Assembly chosen on 7 th of March 1965 represented
a commission for the review of the constitution fro m 1952.
The plenary session of the party approved the revie w project of the
fundamental law on 28 th of June, the operation followed shortly by voting and
assuming the policy changes in the constitutional o rder. This episode

1 Gheorghe Sbârnă, coord., Constituțiile României: studii , Târgoviște, Cetatea de Scaun, 2012,
p. 90O93.
2 Ibidem , p. 93.

Analele Universității din Craiova, Seria Istorie, A nul XIX, Nr. 2(26)/2014

104 significantly bind and rename operation, the rebran ding of the Romanian
Workers'Party becomes, thus, the Romanian Communist Party, changing the
entitle being set within the framework of the IV th Congress of the PMR, which
now becomes the IX th Congress of the Romanian Communist Party. Gheorghe
GheorghiuODej was dead (19 th of March) and at the head of the party was
chosen Nicolae Ceaușescu, his protected.
The new Constitution is voted on 21 st of August 1965 and promulgated
in the same day. Again, the denomination of the sta te is changed in the Socialist
Republic of Romania. Regarding the local administra tion, the Title V reiterated
the attributions and the obligations of the local a dministration, of people's
councils, composed forward from president, viceOpre sident and members.
In the administrative field, on 16 th of February 1968 takes place the first
change made through the Law no. 2/1968 1. This, after the Plenary Session CC
of PCR from 5O6th of October 1967 proposed new principles for the
administrativeOterritorial reorganization of the co untry, the changes being
adopted at the National Conference of PCR from 6O8th of December 1967.
Once adopted, the law brings significant changes. T he People's Councils
are renamed Popular Councils, but the most importan t change is that which
abolish the regions and the districts, returning to traditional counties. In respect
to townships and towns, these were managed by mayor s and the municipalities
were refunded.
Thus, the administrative units of Romania became th e county, the town
and the township, Bucharest municipality was organi zed on sectors and the
important towns, “with a particular importance in t he economic, socialOpolitical
and culturalOscientific life of the country”, becam e municipalities.
The people's councils were replaced with popular co uncils, which had
the role to manage and to guide the activity of loc al specialty bodies of state
administration. The Romania's territory was divided in 2706 townships, 189
towns, 47 municipalities, 39 counties and Bucharest municipality with 8
sectors.
The counties, formed by townships and towns, were d efined as
“fundamental units of administrativeOterritorial or ganization of the country –
depending on the geographical, economic and socialO political, ethnic conditions
and on the cultural and traditional relations of th e population” (art. 3).
According to the art. 9, their counties and residen cies 2 were:
1. Alba with the residence in Alba Iulia municipality
2. Arad with the residence in Arad municipality

1 “Monitorul Oficial” al Republicii Socialiste Român ia, Partea I, an IV, nr. 17O18, 17 februarie
1968.
2 Towns where the governing bodies of the county hav e the head offices – art. 4 from Law no.
2/1968.