Open Decision Making2021-08-30T12:56:22+02:00

OPENING UP DECISION MAKING

RESEARCH SHOWS THERE IS A SERIOUS LACK OF TRANSPARENCY WHEN TRYING TO KNOW HOW DECISIONS ARE TAKEN IN EUROPE

THIS IS WHAT WE FOUND, AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE

ONLY 40% OF KEY DECISION-MAKING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

The map below explores the different obstacles we’ve encountered accessing information on decision-making processes in 12 European jurisdictions.

  • Information available:
  • 0-20%
  • 21-40%
  • 41-60%
  • 61-80%
  • 81-100%

We analysed 5 decision making proccess. It was impossible to access most of the information. There is a serious problem when it comes to contacts with lobbyists.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 7 decision making process. Access to information was partailly possible. There is a serious problem with record keeping: one third of the information requested was not held by the public authority.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 15 requests done throught AsktheEU.org.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 3 decision making process. There is a lack of record keeping of minutes of meetings.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 4 decision making process. There are serious problem with disclosing information about participants in meetings, including name of public officials, companies or lobbyists.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 3 decision making process. There is a clear breach of the Law: Authorities failed to process most of the access to information requests.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 3 decision making process. Relevant documents for understanding decision-making processes are not proactively available.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 6 decision making process. It is very worrying that there is no information available at all.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 3 decision making process. Key information on decision making processes, such as minutes of meetings and documents provided by lobbyists, was not proactively published.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 3 decision making process. Relevant documents to understand decision-making processes are not proactively available.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 4 decision making process. There is a lack of record keeping of dates, places and minutes of meetings.
Find out all about it here.
We analysed 5 decision making process. Access to the minutes of meetings and documents submitted by lobbyist is denied in most of the cases because of the cost of compiling exception.
Find out all about it here.

THE FINDINGS: MAIN CHALLENGES FOR TRANSPARENCY

Europe's Access to Information laws permit requests for decision-making information

What we have found

However, an analysis of these 12 European laws has told us there is no obligation to record minutes of meetings held as part of decision-making processes.

Insufficient levels of proactive publication of information is impeding participation

What we have found

European countries are not proactively publishing who public officials meet, reasons justifying their decisions, nor records created regarding policy and legislation.

Information released through FOI requests is not enough to ensure accountability

What we have found

European countries are abusing the use of certain exceptions to deny access to documents, such as the protection of privacy when it comes to government and public officials.

RECOMMENDATIONS: TOWARDS OPEN DECISION MAKING

  • Transparency applies to all

All public bodies which bear responsibility for decision making should fall under the scope of the access to information laws.

  • Create records

Public authorities have a duty to document information around decision-making processes that is essential to ensure public participation and scrutiny, as well as for the historical record.

  • Improve proactive publication requirements

Public authorities and representatives should be obliged to keep records and proactively publish information such as their agendas, minutes of meetings, third-party documents (submitted as part of or outside public consultations) and information justifying decisions taken.

  • Reduce time taken to make information publically available

Prompt responses to requests are essential to facilitate potential participation in decision-making processes. This also counts when responding to appeals.

  • Apply exceptions narrowly to information related to decision making

Exceptions should always be applied narrowly and always taking into account any overriding public interest in full (or partial) disclosure of information.

“Decision-making transparency means to be able
to know how decisions are taken, by whom and why,
to be able to participate and hold our leaders accountable.
It is essential to our democracies.”

Helen Darbishire
Executive Director, Access Info Europe

CAMPAIGN MATERIALS: INTRODUCING
THE DECISION-MAKING TRANSPARENCY KIT!

If you are interested in knowing about a decision-making process, want to search for information, submit a request, or campaign for greater transparency of decision making, you might consider taking a look at the following materials!

CLICK ON THE IMAGES
OR SCROLL DOWN TO ACCESS
THE ALL OF THE CONTENT
DIRECTLY!

LOOKING FOR INFORMATION?
THESE ARE THE DOCUMENTS YOU CAN ASK FOR

Both at a national and at the EU level, certain documents are created during the decision-making process. These documents will give you an insight into how a decision was taken. We have created these two presentations explaining, at each phase of decision making, which documents are created, which are proactively published, and which may be requested.

AT NATIONAL/GENERAL LEVEL

AT EUROPEAN UNION LEVEL

CASE STUDIES: CAN WE KNOW HOW THE DECISION WAS TAKEN?

TTIP: HOW TRANSPARENT ARE THE NEGOTIATIONS?

SHINING A LIGHT INTO
TOBACCO LOBBYING

MAPPING THE INFLUENCE OF THE SUGAR LOBBY

Aiming to contribute to an informed public debate around TTIP and its levels of transparency, we have investigated what information in regards to the negotiations is available, and what is not.

We analysed if interactions between the tobacco industry, EU institutions and national governments are conducted in compliance with transparency rules.

We looked into the legislative proposal to adopt a colour-coded food labelling system which classifies fats, sugars and salts, trying to discover the extent of the influence of lobbies.

WHEN DECISION-MAKING IS TRANSPARENT:
GOOD PRACTICE EXAMPLES!

  • Disclosing handwritten notes containing minutes from a meeting!

  • They tweeted, we asked for the document… they released it!

  • The 100 MB of information release: emails, amendments and more!

  • Proactive and reactive disclosure of information at the EU level

WE ASKED EXPERTS AND OFFICIALS:
WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT TO OPEN UP DECISION MAKING?

As part of our research we have spoken with the EU Ombudsman and other experts on the topic, to find out their views and understandings on the importance of transparency around decision making. Find all interviews on Access Info’s YouTube channel.

HELPFUL JURISPRUDENCE: LITIGATING FOR
ACCESS TO INFORMATION

In order to help activists and civil society to push for greater transparency, and secure positive changes in transparency practices, we have collected and displayed the jurisprudence relating to the disclosure of documents.

You will find a series of cases from all across Europe which we hope will be useful in order to map what, where and why we can access key pieces of public information related to decision-making.

PARTNER ORGANISATIONS WORKING WITH US TO PROMOTE DECISION MAKING TRANSPARENCY:

OPEN DECISION MAKING LATEST NEWS

13Dec 2016

Leave no trace? How to combat off the record government

[Article first published by Progressive Economy @ TASC] Dublin, 13 December 2016 - While historical archives are a rich part of our cultural heritage, there are many day-to-day reasons why we should care about how governments and public bodies currently make and keep records of their actions and decisions. At a very basic level, records and are vital for good

2Dec 2016

Access Info challenges European Commission secrecy around EU-Turkey refugee deal legal advice before the European Court of Justice

Madrid, 2 December 2016 – Access Info Europe is taking the European Commission to the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union to obtain its legal analysis of this year’s controversial EU-Turkey deal on return of refugees to Turkey. The 18 March 2016 deal – officially “statement” – which is having a direct impact in the

24Nov 2016

Europe: access to information in practice, not just on paper

[Article first published by the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso] Long established and widely recognized, the right to access to information is severely curtailed in many European countries due to deficient implementation of existing law In case you missed it, this year marks the 250th anniversary since the world’s first transparency law was adopted, in Sweden in 1766. At a quick

28Sep 2016

Statement by European RTI Community on the world’s First Official Access to Information Day!

Madrid, 28 September 2016 - On the first officially-recognised International Right to Know Day [1], European civil society groups working on the right of access to information today raised concerns that a lack of government transparency is damaging democratic processes, thereby facilitating rising mistrust and demagogic populism in Europe. Recent monitoring by civil society organisations has demonstrated that while significant

5Sep 2016

Record-keeping and timely publication of information are essential for meaningful participation Access Info tells Council of Europe

Madrid, 5 September 2016 – Access Info has submitted recommendations to the Council of Europe on how to improve its Draft guidelines for meaningful civil participation in political decision-making so as to ensure that records are kept and that there is timely publication of relevant documents. This recommendation comes after research across Europe by Access Info and partners revealed abysmal