Parliament and Civil Society

International Best PracticesPresented By

Marvi SirmedNational Project Manager, SDPD (UNDP)

September 24, 2008

Legislature and Civil SocietySame working sphere:

Independent of the StateElevate the public or collective good over private / individual gainAdvocate of the changeOversight of the government’s / executive’s actionsWatching formulation and implementation of public policyLimits and controls the power of the statePlay an important role in mediating and helping to resolve conflict

So there is an immense potential and need for both of them to work together!

Commonwealth Principles on Parliament and Civil Society

The Latimer House Principles

“The parliaments and governments should recognize the role that civil society plays in the implementation of the Commonwealth’s fundamental values and should strive for a constructive relationship with civil society to ensure that there is broader opportunity for meaningful participation in the democratic process.”

Public Scrutiny of Legislature“Public scrutiny of the legislature is enabled by the ability of media and civil society groups to closely observe legislative activities. Without the involvement of media and civil society groups, the functions of the legislature can not be deemed to be transparent.”

Source: NDI. Toward the Development of International Standards for Democratic Legislatures: A Discussion Document for Review by Interested Legislatures, Donors and International Organizations (Washington DC: January 2007, NDI) p.61

International Best Practices

Benchmarks agreed by CPA, IPU, OECD include

Openness and accessibility of legislature to citizens

Transparency in Committees’ proceedings including Public Accounts Committees

Openness and wider citizens’ engagement in legislative process through public hearings etc

Involving Civil Society in the Work of Parliaments

I- Referendums and InitiativesReferendums and initiatives are used to test public opinion on specific issues, in 3 forms:

1.Instigated by legislature to approve changes in constitutional arrangements

2.Initiated by legislature to confirm changes in public policy

3.Citizens initiated measures to change either the constitution or public policyD

irect

Cit

izen

s’

Part

icip

ati

on

II- Consensus Conferences

These are means of incorporating the perspectives of lay members of civil society within the assessment of new scientific and technological developmentsA forum of lay people questions experts about a controversial scientific or technological subject, assesses the experts' responses, reaches a consensus & reports its conclusions at a press conference

Consensus Conferences – Some Case Studies

Denmark – Topics• 1987 Genetic technology in industry and agriculture• 1989 Food irradiation• 1989 Human genome mapping• 1990 Air pollution• 1991 Educational technology• 1992 Transgenic animals• 1993 The future of private transport Infertility• 1994 Electronic identity cards Information technology

in transport Integrated production in agriculture• 1995 Chemicals in foodstuffs and the environment

Gene therapy

Consensus Conferences – Some Case Studies

Netherlands – Topics•1993 Genetic modification of animals•1995 Human genetics research

United Kingdom – Topics• 1994 Plant biotechnology in food and

agriculture

III- Citizens’ JuriesPioneered in the 1970s in the United States and Germany; German model in use in Spain, The Netherlands and Palestine. Also been run in the UK since the mid 1990sGroup of randomly chosen citizens deliberates on a particular issue, setting of a policy agenda / choice of particular policy optionsparticipants are exposed to information about an issue, hear views from witnesses selected on the basis of their expertise / represent affected interests

Citizens’ Juries – Some Case Studies

United States of America - Topics: •1984 Impacts of agriculture on water

quality in Minnesota •1989 At risk children in Greater New

Haven•1992 Candidate ratings for the senate •1993 National healthcare reform •1995 Hog farming in Rice county •1995 Congestion pricing for Minnesota

Citizens’ Juries – Some Case Studies

Germany  - Topics• 1980 Cologne town hall project • 1985 Energy supply for Johchen Nord • 1990 Integrated Services Digital Network

(ISDN) in the private and professional environment

• 1991 Road sifting for the centre of Revelsberg • 1996 Development of residential site in

Solingen-Aufderhohe • 1996 Review of public transport system in

Hanover

Citizens’ Juries – Some Case StudiesUnited Kingdom - Topics• 1996 Drugs and community safety, Lewisham• 1996 Services for the dying for Walsall Health

Authority • 1996 The future of waste management in

Hertfordshfre • 1997 Improvement of the Swiss Cottage site,

Camden• 1997 Taste and decency on television • 1997 Genetic testing and the insurance industry • 1997 Graffiti and vandalism, South Lanarkshire • 1997 Creating employment opportunities in

Levenmouth

IV- Deliberative Opinion Polling

A national random sample of between 250-600 citizens is brought together to discuss and debate a particular issueCarefully balanced briefing material is provided, opportunity is given to question competing experts and politiciansAt the end of the process and after much small-group discussions, the citizens are polled in detailResulting survey offers a representation of the considered judgments of the wider populationDeliberative opinion polls do not aim at the production of consensus. They are therefore a good means of measuring the diversity of public opinion

Deliberative Opinion Polling – Case Studies

United Kingdom -  Topics •1994 'Rising Crime: What can we do about it?‘ •1995 The UK's future in Europe •1996 The future of the monarchy •1997 Voting intentions for the British General

Election     United States of America -  Topics 1996 National Issues Convention for

Presidential candidate selection 1996 Polls conducted by three public utilities in

Texas

Citizens’ Panels• Two kinds of citizens' panels: standing panels and research

panels

• Research panels use a large sample of a local population as a sounding board to tracks changes in opinion over time

• Standing citizen's panels consist of a stable sample of citizens statistically representative of an area's population, weighted for gender, age, ethnic background & occupation.

• Panel meets regularly to assess local services and develop views about future needs and goals

• Standing panels can be used to test specific policy options or proposals or to scrutinize policy implementation

• The membership of the panel is periodically changed

Public Hearings

•Civil Society Organizations specializing on various subjects can participate in the committee proceedings and provide their specialized input to the public hearings.

•Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of National Assembly of Pakistan (2007) do not bar conducting Public Hearings by the Committees

Other Mechanisms for Direct Participation of Non-Members

• Submission to a Parliamentary Committee Inquiry• Appearing as a Witness before a Parliamentary

Committee• Roundtables of subject specialists with

parliamentary committees (initiated in most countries by the civil society, in the case of USA, it is mostly done by the Committees using their allocated budget)

• Issue based civil society networks corresponding with the parliamentary committees / caucuses

• Public Petitions

CS Participation in Budget ProcessNegative myths that constrain independent budget work of civil society, legislatures and the media

•Budgets must be formulated in secret or they may upset financial markets

•Non-government intervention can destroy the integrity of the budget envelope

•Legislators and civil society have a greater interest in advancing the interests of their constituents as opposed to the interests of the country as a whole

•It is the government’s mandate to produce the budget internally in a closed process; and it’s prerogative for it to be rubber-stamped by the legislature

CS Participation in Budget Process – Some Ideas

• Simplification of the budget and deepening debate;• Collating, synthesizing and disseminating budget information;• Independent critical analysis• Bringing new information to budget decision-making:• Develop budget training expertise that is directed at

augmenting the analytical and advocacy capacity of other civil society organizations, legislatures and the media resulting in stronger interventions and oversight

• Through analysis and dissemination activities, CSOs can assist the legislature to reinforce channels of accountability (possible through active engagement with PAC and pursue the findings of AG

• Parliament may make key budgetary information open to citizens including findings of AG and PAC

• Parliament may organize a (or series of) pre-budget seminars

Some Recommendations for Civil Society and Parliament in Pakistan

a) Development of new forms of interactions with civil society:

• More effective use of information technologies to enhance transparency and to ease relations with civil society.

• Use of internet and other communication technologies in maintaining relations.

• Strengthen the relation of parliament and civil society by developing more programmes, by enhancing the use of information technologies

• Establish more and more direct relations between the Members of the Parliaments and citizens: e-Parliament

Some Recommendations for Civil Society and Parliament in Pakistan

b) Expansion and differentiation of existing relations • A wider involvement of CSOs in legislative preparation and in

expert assistance in the legislative procedure

• Establishing closer relation, new forms in the relations with civil society

• Improvement of dialogue

• At an early stage of legislation communication of opinion and comments of civil society towards the parliament and committees

• Wider involvement of CSOs in legislative preparation

• Involvement of civil society in monitoring and assessment of legislation.

Some Recommendations for Civil Society and Parliament in Pakistan

c) Quality improvement and legislation of interactions

• The actors of civil society and legislation should consider each other as partners, not as opposite sides

• Establishment of mutually beneficial relation

• Development of channeled relations, encouragement of civil society to concretely articulate its opinions, to make comprehensive proposals instead of just reacting to single events

• Stimulation of citizens’ initiatives

• ·Support to people’s initiatives

More Specifically• Pilot and replicate parliamentary committee processes that

engage civil society groups and citizens in innovative and meaningful ways

• Establish a centre for public engagement within parliament

• Support individual parliamentarians to play a more active role in engaging with their constituents (greater CS engagement with constituency offices)

• Create Party Institutes / Foundations to strengthen political parties’ policy roles

We can create a virtuous rather than a vicious circle in which civil society and parliament

interact with each other and with citizens to create stronger democracies and civil society

Thank you for your time and attention

For further information, Please contact:

Strengthening Democracy through Parliamentary Development in Pakistan (SDPD

7 & 8, Ground Floor, Block B & D, Parliament Lodges, Islamabad (Pakistan)Ph: +92-51-920 5430 / 1

Fax: +92-51-8255963Email: info@sdpd.org.pkURL: www.sdpd.org.pk