The administrative court notified its decision to the Collectivity of Saint-Martin, Tuesday March 10, 2020 (decision n ° 1700095 of March 9, 2020), informing it that its request on the just compensation of the inherent charges during the transfer of competences to the Community in 2007, is rejected for the following reasons: the interministerial decree of April 22, 2011 was published in the official journal on May 4, 2011, this decree (although it produces effects every year), became final for the court , in all its provisions even when it fixes the amount of the allowance in terms of social compensation.
To reject the request of the Collectivity, the court considers that the latter does not demonstrate the fault of the State and more precisely the fraudulent intention. The Collectivity wishes to retain two essential points here:
- It is not disputed that the Collective's request rests on a serious basis.
- Each year, the Collectivity suffers considerable damage which is not disputed: in terms of social compensation, an annual allocation of 652 euros is paid!
- To correspond to the actual expenditure of the Collectivity in 2006, as calculated by article D 6371-1 of the CGCT, an amount of 7 euros should be added, each year since 914.
The Collectivity therefore requests the revision of the method of calculating the allocation for the future, because it is unfair for it to bear these calculation errors indefinitely. She noted that the court did not answer on this point. The Collectivity also requests reimbursement of the sums due to it. It is a legitimate claim of the Collective.
As stated by master Benjamin, who defends the Collectivity on this file, “according to the court we have not demonstrated the deliberate will of the State to deceive the Collectivity! But the damage is irreparable for the Community if the calculation method is not changed! The legitimate expectations of the Collective have been deceived because in fact no verification or control has been up to the challenge, in particular on the subject of the charge transferred to the Collective for compensation in social matters! Nobody thought that they could or should question the expertise that was used since the state arbitrated the proceedings! "
The texts are clear: "any net increase in charges is accompanied by the concomitant transfer of the resources necessary for the normal exercise of these powers" (article LO 6371-4 of the CGCT). These principles are not respected.
An ad hoc commission had been created to assess the sum of the endowments from which the Collectivity was to benefit, but none of the members of this commission ensured the reliability of the data provided to the Saint-Martin collectivity; However, the State represented by the Prefect and the Territorial Chamber of Accounts, of which a member chaired the commission, had access to all the accounts and all the data of the department of Guadeloupe, which was not the case for the community of Saint-Martin which had no experience in the management of social assistance (having never assumed this competence!), and whose expert appointed by it was refused access to the accounts of the department . Thus, the Collectivity of Saint-Martin never had any statistical data, because these data were confused on the scale of Guadeloupe as a whole.
As a guarantor of fair trade, the State nevertheless had the duty to carry out these verifications.
It is therefore only in 2017, after the publication of the report of the Territorial Chamber of Accounts on the management of the community of Saint-Martin for the period 2007-2016 that the President of the Community, Mr. Daniel Gibbs, discovered these difficulties. This report revealed the gross error made when the endowments were evaluated.
The intention of the State is obvious: it will not arbitrate between the two twin communities (Saint-Martin and Guadeloupe). No verification has been made and no statistics are used to calculate the allocation; the Collectivity of Saint-Martin was sacrificed because the sharing of data was not organized… It was therefore a strategic choice which led to deceive the Saint-Martinois.
Beyond this obvious institutional strategy, a whole territory has been penalized and the future of the Saint-Martinois has been mortgaged. The impact on public action is indeed considerable.
A fair financial assessment of the transfer of skills would have opened up a whole new future for Saint-Martin by giving it the sums really necessary for the installation of the new COM with the rise of the territorial institution and its public policies at the service of the general interest. The damage is therefore immense! The principle of equality before public charges is not respected! The COM will demonstrate this!
This is why the Collectivity of Saint-Martin will continue its legal action on behalf of the Saint-Martinois and will appeal this decision to demonstrate the fraud of the rights, which are however guaranteed to it by the French constitution.
6,141 total views
No comments