Historically learning, scientific analyzing the issue of the position of the local representative authorities in our national statehood is of great importance. Because for realizing the gist of these or those historical events, foremost, it can be observed how they happened in particular condition of this or that historical step, what steps have been passed and what configured and significant changes happened in its development. Without this kind of approaching, today, especially in the years of independence forming the local representative authorities which are the ingredient of our national statehood and understanding the point of the political reforms regarding to developing their activity, evaluating them fairly are difficult.
One more methodological situation should be mentioned regarding this matter. That is the existence and development of the representative authorities of the government in Uzbekistan is completely tied with the historical evolution of existence and development of our parliament.
It is known to us, in the local government system, especially, representative authorities being the historical view of the democratic principles which came into being in our country; it has formally and significantly changed for thousand years and has a particular experience.
According to the evidence of the historical facts, in the past there were great states, their political institutions and systems in the area of present Uzbekistan. It is necessary to note many examples concerning the history of our country. Having a long past and wealthy history our country’s political independence has been firmly established, now in order to put the past way, all its trends and developing steps into effect, we should restudy the different spheres of our history analyzing fairly in detail.
Particularly, representative authorities occupy the leading part in the local government authorities of all developed countries. Because of being elected by direct, general, equal and hidden way of voting, a representative authority has a right to act for the sake of public and make decisions from its name. According to the evidence of the historical facts, from the ancient times in Uzbekistan all the important decisions, questions, whether concerning the internal life of the country or the external policy; they were accepted directly with the agreement of public and its representatives’ congress. Because it is known from the world practice, in any country’s government system, if the people’s wish were not taken into consideration that kind of system had faced to decline.
As a well-known historian I. Jabborov mentioned, from the ancient times, special persons, the leaders of mahalla that is the most respectful people of the mahalla led the society. From time to time he was elected and a patkor among the men and a kayvoniy or a representative among the women was appointed as a helper of him. Naturally at that time the population of mahalla was classified into different classification on the base of the principles of the feudal system of that time.
However, no matter who he was, the old men’s opinion was the final and important in the social meetings. Ancient tribal and community relationships were positively kept by the new era.
Academic E. Rtveladze, a lawyer A. Saidov and E. Abdullayev noted the same idea. “In the primitive society governing is interpreted with the existence of social government institutions. One of them was the general meeting of the tribe and the important problems were discussed and solved in it”- they emphasized.
This kind of idea is explained in our holy book Kuran. Specifically, in it, that is as it is indicated in the verse 38, “Their (faithful men’s) work is done by mutual deliberating”.
So, as it is obvious, the question whether it belongs to the whole country or the region, of course, it was solved on the basis of deliberation and by the agreement of the representatives. Relating this participation of the public in the work of state and society was provided by its representatives or leaders’ of mahalla and it has become tradition from the ancient time.
In one of the important source in studying the history of our country, Zardushts’ holy book “Avesto” much valuable information about the political system of the society is indicated. As it is known from “Avesto”, the socio-political system at that time consisted of hierarchical steps which depend on each other, that is, a state, a king (kavi), a leader of society (vis), a military chief (dahyu sastar), a supreme court (zaratushtroema), the leaders’ council (varzanapati). The position of the leaders’ council in the political system of the society was very high.
So, from the century II BC to the century III AD in the ancient Fergana (Parkana) state the importance of the leaders’ council in the state life as very high too. The head of the state was Van, in governing the state he acted depending on his two deputies and the court of law of the state works administering. Because the leaders’ council which acted under his rule had the right to solve the war ad peace problems and even the fate of the king, it was a democratic authority whose reputation was very strong in the state.
The doctor of history, Professor Sh. Mahmudbekov also notes the idea close to it. Accordingly he said: “In the ancient Fergana (Parkana) state leaders’ council solved the important problems such as declaring wars, making agreements, appointing ministers and taxes, mobilizing for the social works.” Particularly at the time of Chinese attacking at Fergana the leaders’ council stood on the side of making mutual agreement and achieved it. The ruler Muguy who was found guilty for the events relating to the Chinese conquest, was executed by the decision of the leaders’ council. In the course of this, “The leaders’ council worked in the ancient state Davan being permanent sometimes solved the fate of the kings and ambassadors. For instance, during the negotiations a Chinese ambassador angrily knocked the golden horse sculpture over. The leaders found it offence for them selves and he as executed”.
In the century II BC in the state of Qang including Sugdiana, Horezm, lower and middle stream of the Sirdarya the areas of present Uzbekistan, Karakalpakistan, and Southern Kazakhstan there was leaders’ council advising in the Khan’s presence. It can be seen that in the ancient Qang state the elected King’s authority was depended on the leaders’ council and meanwhile it was limited by the council. Electing a new ruler and the King’s decision which was bequeathed for his son or close relative to sit on the throne was officially confirmed by the leaders’ council. Such tradition was particularly observed in the next steps of our history.
In the time of Sakhibkiran Amir Temur too a great attention was drawn to the position and role of the advising authority in the life of state and society. As it was indicated in the book “Temur Tuzuklari” a great attention was given to deliberating, consulting and expertise in maintaining the state.
In the book it was said: “The nine parts of the state works are congress, course of action and counseling, the rest one part is a sword”. According to the well-known historian academic B. Ahmedov, for the consulting and congress held in the presence of Amir Temur we can indicate the kurultoy and state congress. Kurultoy was the council of supreme feudal layer in the time of Temur and time by time the important issues of state life were discussed in it.
According to the historical sources, kurultoys were held in Balh, Karshi, Karabag and Samarkand. Such ceremony peculiar to the East was even called Nation’s Meeting. Having been victorious over Temur’s enemies, one of such kurultoys was held in Balh on April 8, 1369, and the noblemen of Cigatoy Ulus, the armed mils of temur the amirs who were enemy to hium before and later passed to his service participated in it. The well-known Hungarian historian H. Vamberi wrote about it like that: In the Kurultoy held in Balh according to the ancient Turkish tradition Temur was seated on a white felt, raised high, after a short prayer he was declared as the Amir of Movaraunnahr.
Amir Temur worked on the issues of the state importance consulting with the special;ists on a definite sphere. For instance, in 1403 scientists and specialists were invited to the meeting of the council in Baylakon and they suggested their recommendations about building social buildings and constructions and public services.
So, one can be agree with the following conclusion of a lawyer A. Dadasheva: “From the historical point of view the formation of modern local government authorities date back to the time of Sakhibkiran Amir Temur.”
So, today in deepening the democratic progress occurring in our state, interpreting the political ideas about modernizing the country, talking about the ancient traditions peculiar to the national statehood, we find it useful naturally addressing to the past and ancient traditions.
