January 2013

Civil Society Coordination Newsletter

January 2013

Highlights
Ukrainian report

highlights OGP experiences in 6 countries.

Regional OGP

Editorial Letter Dear colleagues, One of my 2013 New Years resolutions was to get a regular newsletter to you twice a month. Here is our first one. Soon we will be streamlining our mailing lists and launching a website full of resources. Last week in Ireland I saw that a mix of smart networking, creative advocacy and determination from a handful of individuals can spark enthusiasm for OGP in government and parliament. Change agents are connected and the dialogue on priorities started even before a letter of intent was sent. Irish activists learned from the experiences of colleagues in Moldova and Croatia and will now share their insights with colleagues in Uganda that are working in a fresh attempt to convince their government to join OGP. These efforts leave no doubt that positive energy and cooperation are two cornerstones of the Partnership Some other early 2013 highlights: The Ukrainian Institute for Public Policy published a very good report on OGP experiences in 6 countries. The report highlights weaknesses and areas for improvement, but also tells us that if willingness to interact and basic (political) conditions are in place, then fertile ground for cooperation and smart commitments can be created and has been created. Cross-country work is also happening around open government in other regions. In Africa, AFIC (with the support of the World Bank) has started a package of work including regular video conferences to share experiences, get plans and implementation to a higher level and prepare for the African regional meeting later this year. You can view the videoconference here and find an analysis here. One of my takes from the regional meeting in Chile was that the many existing regional networks and coalitions are crucial for cross-country learning and coordination, and for making OGP work. The energetic meeting also highlighted that people are very keen to be included in OGP discussions and governance, that they are watching the IRM closely and are expecting clear communication and answers on a number of topics soon. As said, from our side we will beef up communications in the coming months. Just to reiterate you can always ask questions either to me or to Emilene Martinez by mail, Twitter or Skype and we will be happy to answer them or connect you to the right person within OGP. We will also organize a few calls where you can ask questions or submit concrete suggestions to the civil society Steering Committee members. The next full Steering Committee meeting is in April and it will be good to know what your priorities are before then. Final point for now: dont forget that you can nominate yourself or someone else for the OGP Steering Committee. No better way to voice your critique and suggestions than having a seat directly at the table. You are also very welcome to help us select the best candidates. Best, Paul

event held in Chile.

Nominations

Open for Civil Society Members in the Steering Committee

Call for IRM Lo-

cal Researchers

Inside this issue: OGP progress in Eastern 2 Partnership Countries and Russia Submit your Nominations for the Steering Committee Upcoming Events and Webinars News from the IRM Latest from the Civil Society Coordination 3

3 4 4

In Case You Missed It... 5 Regional OGP Event in Chile 6

Civil Society Coordination Newsletter

Page 2

OGP progress in Eastern Partnership Countries and Russia

Recently the Ukrainian Institute for Public Policy, in cooperation with Transparency Internationals chapters in the Eastern Partnership countries and Russia, published an analytical paper focusing on how these countries are implementing their OGP commitments, their main challenges and how to address them. The authors of the article found that the experiences of the six countries examined differed considerably. Based on their progress in OGP implementation, the six countries were divided in champs (Moldova and Georgia) and slowpokes (Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Ukraine). Real progress in OGP implementation was observed only in Georgia and Moldova, where the process was characterized by highly dynamic government actions, high quality legislation, and solid communication between CSOs and governments. The fact that these governments had plans and policies consistent with OGP standards and values in their pipelines increased the efficiency of their implementation of OGP action plans and a stronger ownership of them. The other analyzed countries experienced a variety of substantial obstacles hindering smooth OGP implementation: little CSO interest in OGP (Armenia); poor communication between government and CSOs (Russia, Ukraine); lack of political will (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine and Russia); and low quality of legislation developed under the action plan framework or legislation that is inconsistent with other legislative initiatives based on OGP principles (Azerbaijan, Ukraine). Additionally, it was found that progress in the OGP process in any given country depends largely on three interrelated factors: Presence or absence of political will for more openness within the government; Whether there is a political stability and/or continuity in policies when governments change; Whether the governments agenda already included policies and measures to institute greater openness. were transformed into documents with measurable action plans: specific actions and specific pieces of legislation that need to be adopted, with deadlines and designated executive authorities. In several cases, this kind of cooperation added entire new chapters to the National OGP Action Plans: anti-corruption measures in Armenia and access to public information in Ukraine. Although not all governments in the region were ready to establish an inclusive dialogue with the CSO community at the beginning of the OGP process, in the majority of countries CSOs managed to shape the conditions for this dialogue. Three of the lessons learned were: - There is a room for improved cooperation between governments and CSOs in each of the six countries. Because the participation of CSOs was among the formal criteria for developing plans, the OGP process became a productive exercise to test mechanisms for cooperation. - Governments still need to be more inclusive in the process of consulting with civil society. When they only communicate with a few NGO partners, the whole process becomes artificial and the final results are poor. - A problem of poor institutional capacity in dealing with government openness professionally was identified. There are only few organizations interested in the OGP process per se in each country. There is a need to increase awareness of the process across the board. - Additionally there is a problem of growing public demand for open information, which is one of the pillars of the OGP process in many countries. To make the whole concept of open government work, broader cooperation across different sectors needs to be establishedCSOs, business and government as there should be systems that enable the every-day use of open information by citizens, and they should have an opportunity to make use of this data. This will spur demand for open information and will push governments towards further openness.

The results of the consultation process were all together quite positive. CSOs that took part in the consultation process in five of the six countries noted that almost all their suggestions were accepted by their governments. The exception was Russia, where negotiations on drafting the National OGP Action Plan have not yet started. In the majority of countriesAzerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine CSOs say that at the end of the consultation process, drafts that had started out vague and unspecific

January 2013

Page 3

Submit Your Nominations for the Steering Committee! (Deadline February 23)
During the last few months our community has worked intensively to design an improved new process for rotation of civil society members of the Steering Committee. Now is the time to nominate the best candidates! From April onwards there will be space for 3 new members that will help address the specific challenges facing OGP in the coming period. This is an opportunity for civil society leaders from across the world to bring their skills, expertise and network to OGP. Of the current nine civil society members in the Steering Committee Tom Blanton (USA The National Security Archive), Gladwell Otieno (Kenya African Center for Open Governance) and Juan Pardinas (Mexico IMCO) have volunteered to rotate off. With your help the process will attract strong candidates from a diversity of regions and backgrounds, leading to a balanced team of civil society members on the Steering Committee that are well-positioned to continue to provide strategic and effective leadership to OGP. The new members will join OGP at a vital moment - with most fundamentals in place, the task is not only to further shape OGP policies and work, but also to build strong and effective civil society participation at the national level. The selection will be undertaken by a committee, comprised of Tom Blanton and Rakesh Rajani of the current Steering Committee, two volunteers from the broader OGP CSO community and the Civil Society Coordinator. Candidates for the two volunteer positions on the selection committee are invited to send a short motivation letter to Paul Maassen before midnight Central European time on February 8. Key Information on the Process Candidates can nominate themselves or be nominated by other individuals. National, regional and global organizations, networks and coalitions need to nominate a specific staff member and can be national, regional or global. People serve on the Steering Committee in their individual capacity, and do not represent an organization or coalition. The selection is based on a range of criteria - including personal skills, experience, legitimacy in region (s) and/or network(s). Nominations are submitted by sending a nomination form, together with endorsement letters to the independent Civil Society Coordinator at: maassenpaul@gmail.com. All complete nominations will be uploaded in full to the OGP website and will be public for all to see.

Diversity (gender, region, type of experience) will be one of the key filters used in the selection process. Candidates from Latin America, Africa, Europe and Asia/Oceania are especially encouraged to apply. The nomination phase closes at midnight Central European time on February 23. The nomination form is online and downloadable here.

Upcoming Events and Webinars

February 5, 2013 at 12:00 1:00 PM EST: Webinar on the Independent Report Mechanism (IRM) in Spanish. With Joe Foti, IRM program manager. February 11 and 12: OGP Workshop and Outreach Activities organized by the Government of Costa Rica. For more information contact Emilene (emilene17@gmail.com) and Maikol Porras (maikol.porras@gobierno-digital.go.cr). February 19 at 10:00 AM EST: Webinar on Proactive Transparency. Led by Helen Darbishire (Access Info Europe) and Kevin Dunion (Centre for Freedom of Information at the University of Dundee). March 19 at 10:00-11:00 AM EST: Webinar on E-petitions: Giving Voice to Citizens. With Jennifer Shkabatur (World Bank) Peter Herlihy (UK Government Digital Service) and Ruth Fox (Hansard Society). The National Campaign for Peoples Right to Information is organizing its fourth national convention in Hyderabad from February 16th to the 18th to celebrate and document seven years of the use of the Indian Right to Information law.

Civil Society Coordination Newsletter

Page 4

News from the Independent Reporting Mechanism

During the past few weeks there have been important pact among OGP participating governments. developments regarding the Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM), here is what you need to know: Call for Local Researchers (Deadline February 8) The IRM posted a call for local researchers who will IRM Frequently Asked Questions work on the first 8 countries to be evaluated in 2013: Our colleague Joe Foti put together a very useful docu- Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, Philippines, South Afment that responds frequently asked questions our com- rica, United Kingdom, and United States. The call will remunity has on the IRM. You can download the document main open until close of business, Eastern Standard here. Time, Friday, 8 February, 2013. The actual IRM country reports will be drafted by these International Experts Panel Selects Three Senior Advisors national researchers based on a combination of interand Five Technical Experts views with local OGP stakeholders, analysis of relevant The International Expert Panel is made of five Senior data, and reports by governments and civil society. Advisors and five Technical Advisors. Broadly speaking, Qualifications for local researchers include: (1) demonthe Senior Advisors play a major role in setting the vision strated history of policy-relevant research; (2) national and promoting IRM findings. The Technical Advisors, all reputation as objective, impartial, and thorough; (3) track renowned experts in transparency, participation, and ac- record of producing write clear, policy-relevant publicacountability, play the principal role of guiding develop- tions. ment and implementation of the IRM. Duties include: (1) clear, consistent communication to Irelands first female President and former UN High IRM Program staff in Washington, DC and to International Commissioner for Refugees, Mary Robinson; Sudanese- Experts Panel; (2) attendance of two or more in-person born entrepreneur, Dr Mo Ibrahim; and Mozambican poli- sessions including a training session in early 2013; (3) pubtician and wife of Nelson Mandela, Graa Machel, were lication of one national research report including execuconfirmed in December as the three Senior Advisors. tive summary. South African researcher Debbie Budlender, U.S. ProThere is a strong preference for nationals of the evalufessor Jonathan Fox, Indian research fellow Yamini Aiyar, ated country and for those with experience directly releUK research fellow Rosemary McGee and Brazilian Profes- vant to country action plans. sor Fernando Abrucio were announced as the Techincal Experts. Collectively they will be responsible for the (IRM), which will allow stakeholders to track progress and im-

Latest from the Civil Society Coordination

Documentation of Consultation Experiences By the end of March we will release two publications, one on OGP consultation experiences during the Action Plan development phase and one on on-going coordination mechanisms. Ms. Dolar Vasani will be interviewing a range of civil society actors in a representative set of 15 countries the coming weeks.. The end result will be a helpful tool and inspiration for all OGP members, but also help highlight where the OGP model might need improvement still. Upcoming Country Visits Paul will be in Jakarta from February 4th to the 7th to meet with local OGP civil society actors. Emilene will be in Costa Rica from February 11th to the 14th to participate in OGP outreach events organized by the national government. If you are based in either country and are interested in a meeting please shoot us an e-mail.

If you have any information or materials that you would want for us to include in our next newsletter please send them to Nout van der Vaart (n.van.der.vaart@hivos.nl) or Emilene Martnez (emilene17@gmail.com). Please keep in mind our next newsletter will be sent out on February 15.

January 2013

Page 5

In Case you Missed It...

Codes of Practice and Public Consultations Webinar. The Webinar hosted by OGPs Networking Mechanism and the World Bank Institute can be viewed here. Edward Andersson, from Involve; Urmo Kbar from the Network of Estonian-Non Profit organizations and Paul Maassen, Independent Civil Society Coordinator, Open Government Partnership were the speakers featured during the event. Videoconference: Open Government Partnership in Africa: Enhancing Civil Societys Role and Engagement. This videoconference was organized by AFIC in collaboration with the OGPs Civil Society Coordinator and the World Bank Institute on January 16, 2013. You can view the videoconference here and find an analysis here. Why Africa Needs Open Legislatures. Blog co-written by Peter Veit of the World Resources Institute (WRI) and Gilbert Sendugwa (AFIC) where they discuss ideas on advancing parliamentary transparency as a means to strengthen access to information and an accountability agenda on the African continent. Available here. Making the OGP Effective: Guidelines for Assessing OGP Action Plans. Report from the Centre for Law and Democracy which presents nine guidelines for assessing the Open Government Partnership (OGP) participating governments action plans. Available here. OGP in Georgia: Achievements and Challenges. Report released by Transparency International Georgia that concludes that citizens in the country do not have much knowledge, proficiency or interest in the Open Government Partnership which makes it a luxury policy of an exclusive club of organizations only. Available here. Assessment Mexican Action Plan. Mexican Civil Society Organizations presented an assessment of the countrys Reinforced Action Plan which was based on proposals presented by eight CSOs. These proposals were translated into concrete commitments involving 22 federal government agencies. At the end of the implementation period of the Reinforced Action Plan, out of the 36 adopted commitments, 21 were fulfilled entirely, 15 were partially fulfilled and 2 were not carried out. Open Data Meet-Up Ireland. In the last week of January Paul Maassen attended the Open Data meet-up in Dublin. Pauls presentation for the event can be found here.

Latin American Civil Society Actively Participates in Regional OGP Event in Chile
Latin American civil society organizations and government officials from across the region participated in an OGP Regional Event hosted by the Secretary-General of the Chilean Presidency in January 10 and 11. The event took place in Santiago and organizations from over 20 countries participated. A broad array of topics was discussed during the events four panels including: the challenges OGP faces in the region; consultation processes in Latin America; the role of oversight bodies in the local OGP dynamic; and transparency and accountability in the legislative branch. lvaro Ramrez Alujas, founder of the Group of Investigation in Government, Administration and Public Policy (GIGAPP), presented preliminary results a comparative analysis of action plans and consultation processes in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. Ramrez Alujas also looked at the countries that are working on the formulation of their action plans: Argentina, Costa Rica and Panama. Ten workshops organized and moderated by civil society organizations were held during the event. These spaces provided a great opportunity for dialogue and discussion between CSOs and governments. Key open government related issues were discussed among them: citizen participation in OGP; transparency in extractive industries; challenges and lessons learned in Latin America; transparency and public security; the role of the media as well as oversight bodies; and transparency in social programs. Additionally, workshops devoted to reviewing action plans and OGPs Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) were held. Additionally, international organizations and CSOs had the opportunity to present open government projects among them: the World Banks Global Partnership for Social Accountability (GPSA) and CEPALs Open Data for Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Two book presentations were held as well for: The Promise of Open Government an effort of regional open government experts; and Transparency Oversight Bodies and Access to the Information in Chile and Mexico coordinated by the Transparency Network (Red de Transparencia RTA). Regional civil society networks actively organized and participated in the event coordinating panels and side meetings, among them: Alianza Regional por la Libertad de Expresin e Informacin; Iniciativa TPA; TILAC network composed of Transparency Internationals chapters in Latin America and the Caribbean; and the Latinamerican Network for Legislative Transparency. More information on the event including downloadable presentations given on workshops and panels can be found here.