Case study: Open Parliament in Georgia
This article was written by Ebenezer Makinde.
Introduction
The democratic journey of Georgia started rather recently with the collapse of the Soviet Communist regime in 1991. However, like many other democratic countries, Georgia’s democracy is fraught with many challenges including polarized politics, dwindling citizens’ trust in government and its institutions etc. In a poll conducted in 2018 by National Democratic Institute (NDI) and CRRC-Georgia, citizens of Georgia expressed their dissatisfaction with the practice of democracy in their country. Though many of the citizens accepted western-style democracy as the best for the country, only 43% think Georgia is currently a democracy and 46% think Georgia is not. This disillusionment with the practice of democracy in Georgia points to an urgent need to rebuild trust in the country’s democratic institutions and processes and consider ways to enhance citizen involvement.
One way that policy makers in Georgia have tried to rebuild trust in the country’s democratic institutions is through open parliament.
Open parliament is defined as a new form of interaction between citizens and legislative powers that promotes citizens` engagement and access to information on parliamentary activities to ensure transparency, accountability and citizens participation.
There is evidence that when the level of trust in political institutions like the parliament, judiciary, executive is high, democratic satisfaction tends to be very high. The Parliament of Georgia in 2017 developed its second Open Parliament Action Plan with 24 commitments which focus on citizen participation, transparency, accountability, and technological innovations. The primary actor was the Parliament of Georgia and other secondary actors included Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI), Civil Society Institute (CS I) etc. In this short article, I provide an evaluation of four of these commitments. I asked this question: in what ways have these commitments improved democracy in Georgia?
Georgia’s Open Parliament Action Plan
The Open Parliament action plan was a broad policy action plan introduced in Georgia in 2017 for the purpose of improving citizens engagement in parliamentary activities and increasing accountability and transparency of Georgia’s Parliament. To achieve these objectives, they created 24 commitments. Below is the list of four of these commitments that I focused on.
E-petition system
Tbilisi City Hall is home to different government institutions in Georgia including the office of the Mayor and City’s Assembly, as well as the Parliament of Georgia. However, for many years, residents of Tbilisi relied on in-print (physical forms) engagements with the parliament which affect the quality and quantity of their engagements with the parliaments and other administrative institutions. However, with the introduction of e-petition systems by the legislative body of the city, the Tbilisi City Council, there has been an increase in citizens participation. For example, after launching the portal, 415 ideas were submitted in a month, and two ideas gathered the required minimum number of signatures to be considered by the city government. The e-petition system has not only increased citizens engagement, but it has continued to serve as a tool for setting priorities for government on issues that affect the citizens.
Inclusive Parliament
In 2013, the Parliament of Georgia ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Convention aimed to support people living with disabilities by encouraging their full and effective integration into the society including their participation in governance. However, despite being the arm of the government that ratified Georgia’s support for the Convention, the infrastructure and services of Parliament of Georgia did not allow for the participation of people living with disabilities in parliamentary activities. To solve the problem, the Parliament of Georgia with collaboration with Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI), United Nations Development Program (UNDP) adapted the Parliament Building and processes (Tbilisi) to the needs of people with disabilities. They also created a platform (digital) for the provision of targeted information to people with disabilities. For example, an adapted version of the Parliament website was created for the blind and visually impaired. This singular act is helping Georgia to create a more inclusive society.
Collaboration with Civil Society
The annual meetings between the Parliament of Georgia and civil society organizations have continued to serve as an avenue for dialog and collaboration between parliament and many non-governmental organizations in Georgia. It has helped to increase accountability, transparency and encourage citizens involvement in parliamentary activities. In these annual meetings, the Parliament headed by the speaker usually gives reports of last parliamentary year and highlight parliamentary activities for the coming year. This provides a valuable opportunity for civil society organizations to ask relevant questions about the activities and actions of the parliament. The video of one of such meetings can be found here: https://youtu.be/Q2U0Qqntw34
A public information module was created on the parliament’s website where information about the activities of the parliament is published in an open data format. As we can see in figure above, citizens and relevant stakeholders can have access to information and data about the activities of the Parliament of Georgia by accessing the “My Parliament” section of the website. By doing this, organizations, civil societies and interested citizens not only have access to information about the parliament, but they have this information in an open format that is accessible, available in machine readable format, and without restrictions.
Conclusion
We have seen how Georgia employs principles and tools of open government to improve democratic practices at the legislative level. Open parliament is an important principle for updating democracy and democratic countries need to make further attempts to open their parliaments. For example, the elaboration of an e-petition system is encouraging more citizens engagement in the activities of the parliament. Citizens and relevant stakeholders are now more interested in what their government is doing than before because they now have access to open data and information about the parliament and other branches of government. This is not to say that Georgia’s democracy is now perfect. Indeed, there are still many other challenges that the country is ravaged with. However, Georgia is a leading country with respect to open parliament in the world. For example, in 2016, only 48% of participating parliaments reported that ICT have improved their engagement with citizens with only 25% among low-income countries including Georgia. For democracy to work for those it meant to serve (the people), there is a need for institutionalization of both digitally enhanced and offline systems of accountability, transparency, collaboration, and participation. It is only in this type of environment that citizens can begin to trust their government and democracy can thrive.
This article has been published as per submission by the student (the author) and based on the lecture given by the professor in the context of an assignment, for comments or edits please contact the author : name.lastname@sciencespo.fr
References
Daniel Smilov (2010).Open Parliaments Transparency and Accountability of Parliaments in South-East Europe. South-East Europe Regional Studies. Friedrich Ebert Stiflung. https://library.fes.de/pdf files/bueros/sofia/07782.pdf
http://www.parliament.ge/en/ajax/downloadFile/88361/Open_Parliament_Eng_Rev15_PRINT
Parliament of Georgia. “Irakli Kobakhidze: The Meetings between the Parliament and the Civil Society Will Be Held on Regular Basis.” Parliament of Georgia. Accessed December 29, 2020. http://www.parliament.ge/en/parlamentarebi/chairman/chairmannews/irakli-kobaxidze-saqartvelos-parlamentsa-da-samoqalaqo-sazogadoebis-warmomadgenlebs-shoris-shexvedrebi-regularulad-gaimarteba.page.
Inter-Parliamentary Union. “World E-Parliament Report 2016.” Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2016.
“Tbilisi_Final-Report_2017.Pdf.” Accessed December 27, 2020. https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Tbilisi_Final-Report_2017.pdf.
Van der Meer, Tom. “In What We Trust? A Multi-Level Study into Trust in Parliament as an Evaluation of State Characteristics.” International Review of Administrative Sciences, 2010. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1177/0020852310372450.
