Session 5: Openness across the State

This article was written by by Michaela Sullivan-Paul and Madison Haussy

Introduction

To update democracy and reboot the State, we need to consider how different branches of government function in relation to one another, how their power influences and regulates the other, and how each branch is perceived by the citizens they serve. As polls from class show, many students in this class trust local levels of government more than the institutions that appear more distant and unapproachable by comparison.

How can other levels of the State learn from the local level? How can the State open to actors in civil society and the private sector, who polls from class indicate are also central to the functioning of a democratic society?

Recent events — whether criticism of the French government’s opaque decision-making process concerning the Covid-19 crisis or the quick pre-election nomination of a conservative Supreme Court judge in the United States — demonstrate how lack of transparency and citizen participation in one branch of the State can taint overall citizen trust and perceptions of their democracy. How can the principles of open government be applied to all levels of the State in order to foster citizen trust holistically?

Definitions

According to the OECD, an open state is “when the executive, legislature, judiciary, independent public institutions, and all levels of government… collaborate, exploit synergies, share good practices and lessons learned among themselves and with other stakeholders to promote transparency, integrity, accountability, and stakeholder participation, in support of democracy” (“Recommendation of the Council on open Government”).

Open government is a governance ethos that involves advancing the opening of all branches of a government by making each independently and collectively, more open, transparent, accountable, ethical, and accessible to their citizens (“Road Map Towards Legislative Openness”). It is necessarily systematic, affecting all decision-making processes and actors including civil servants, citizens, civil society, and members of parliament, among others.

Opening the State and promoting open governance must include the local level, which is often closer to citizens and can have a more direct impact. Open government requires horizontal accountability, through checks and balances, as well as vertical accountability from the highest level of government to citizens.

Each branch of the State can open in unique ways.

• The executive branch, which encompasses the armed forces, enforces rule of law, and includes in many countries, the office of the president or prime minister, should apply openness, accountability, and transparency, but opening the State must go beyond this branch.
• Open Justice, which refers to the judicial branch, requires courts and legal processes to become more accountable, accessible, and fair (“Achieving Open Justice through Citizen Participation and Transparency”). Because of the specificities of the judiciary and the opaqueness of law for many citizens, open justice advocate Carlos E. Jimenez-Gonzalez describes the process as “break[ing] the divide that exists between the judiciary and society” (“Achieving Open Justice…”).
• Open Parliament, which applies to the legislative branch involves not just openness but also accessibility and participation for citizens and civil society. Opening parliaments requires transparency to foster participation, leading to trust and accountability.

Open government initiatives should be adapted to each branch and context, but some examples include government-sponsored hackathons, open budgeting, or publishing the schedules of elected officials. Hackathons usually involve using the technological skills of citizens or members of civil society to collectively solve public challenges. Open budgeting necessitates radical transparency and can involve publishing overall expense breakdowns or individual transactions.

Summary

When asked about which level of government they most trusted, 53% of students reported that they have most trust in local-municipal government, while 29% voted for international, 18% voted for regional/state and none voted for central/national government. This is unsurprising as many individuals express more trust in institutions and organizations that are geographically closer to them.

Conversely, when asked which branch of the government they trust more, only 13% voted for the executive (local) branch, while 40% of students appear to trust the judicial branch the most. This, however, is more surprising considering the findings of Gasco-Hernandez and Jimenez-Gomez (2020), which states that the judicial branch is considered the third most corrupt institution in the world. Here, we see the necessity of creating trust in governmental institutions through horizontal and vertical coordination. In doing so, we may encourage the holistic implementation of long-term solutions which are protected from shifting political interests and remain consistent between all branches of government.

There are many interests represented by the different branches of government, including budgetary concerns (legislative), civil and criminal law (judiciary), and executive order (executive), which must collaborate with non-state actors (public, academics, religious groups, etc.) to encourage open government principles and openness across the state. Thus, democracy is not limited to the central government, but instead, is equally the responsibility of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, as well as the public.

Using the French parliament as an example, it is evident that coordination between all branches of government is extremely challenging. To address this, one may consider institutional mechanisms used to increase openness that target legislative, lobby, and/or budget transparency. Practical approaches such as “Parlement Ouvert” and Open Agenda are useful examples of innovative approaches that foster collaboration between parliamentarians, committees, and the public. Simply by encouraging members of parliament to become more transparent with their schedules and financial budgets, non-state actors can begin to understand the considerations and deliberations of parliamentarians, which reduce the barriers that separate governments from civil society. Though these programs may be simple in theory, the lack of institutional support along with limited resources, creates additional challenges to adapting these practices across Parliament.

Authors Gasco-Hernandez and Jimenez-Gomez are also concerned with openness in the State, but within the context of the judicial system. Through reviewing papers related to openness in the judiciary, Gasco-Hernandez and Jimenez-Gomez synthesize the limited research surrounding open justice and e-justice programs. Consistent among these papers is the conditions for transparency, collaboration, participation, interaction, and integration as fundamental characteristics in achieving openness within the judicial system. However, they too agree that implementation of openness initiatives in the judiciary branch — particularly those that call for an increase of public participation in judicial considerations — are extremely challenging.

By acknowledging the demands of introducing open government practices within a specific branch of government, one can begin to understand the difficulties of introducing these practices across all branches of government. As stated by Gutierrez (2017), “The city is a brain, as a whole made of decentralized nodes.” When considering this, there is a call for integration and coordination between each node to benefit the functionality of the entire network. In the context of open government, this results in programs such as ParticipaLAB, InciLab, and Decide Madrid which are introduced with the intention of strengthening networks of communication and collaboration between the city and its government. Applying the same logic to governmental institutions, a complex network between each branch of government and non-governmental actors emerges and again, the need for communication, collaboration, and trust apply.

Conclusion

A key question for future research is determining how to foster participation of citizens and civil society beyond those already in a dominant social position. An open state is not a means in itself as it does not matter how open the State is if citizens do not access information, share their opinions, or hold the government accountable. If only citizens who already have their voices heard take advantage of openness, opening the state could reify social inequities.

To open the state, government actors need to therefore foster systematic change in how citizens view their institutions. It is not enough to copy and paste innovations from one branch to another, but necessary to think about the role of each branch and what that means for its openness. Governments cannot simply transition towards an open system and hope for the best but must accompany their transition with developing a better understanding of the many parts of the state among citizens and members of civil society.

The challenge we are confronted with today, is how long-term trust can be obtained in the absence of integrated programs of openness. While it is clear that implementing programs to increase transparency, collaboration, and participation within governmental branches remain challenging, their implementation between all branches is even more challenging. An integrated approach across the state, however, is necessary to gain the long-term trust of the public and promote democratic systems that are stable, consistent and reliable for those they serve.

Thus, in order to achieve the objectives of open government, we must advance an understanding of openness that is not exclusive to one area of government but is consistent across the State.

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

Bibliography

“Achieving Open Justice through Citizen Participation and Transparency.” IGI Global, interview with Carlos E. Jiménez-Gómez, Youtube, 11 July 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhTf72iSqCQ.

Declaration on Parliamentary Openness. OpenParliament, 2012, pp. 1–14.

Gasco-Hernandez, Mila, and Carlos E. Jimenez-Gomez. “Information and Technology in Open Justice.” Social Science Computer Review, vol. 38, no. 3, 2018, pp. 247–51.

Madrid as a Democracy Lab | OpenDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/madrid-as-democracy-lab/. Accessed 15 Nov. 2020.

“Recommendation of the Council on Open Government.” OECD, 14 Dec. 2017, www.oecd.org/gov/Recommendation-Open-Government-Approved-Council-141217.pdf.

Road Map Towards Legislative Openness. ParlAmericas, 27 May 2016, parlamericas.org/uploads/documents/Roadmap-EN-SCREEN.pdf.