Refreshing OGP’s Rules of the Game
The Open Government Partnership is a little over five years old. It has expanded rapidly from 8 founding governments to 75 today, and 15 subnational governments. Thousands of civil society organizations are now using OGP to co-create reform commitments with their governments, and to advocate for their issues. In response to this growth, and the recent shifts in geopolitical context, we refreshed our strategy in late 2016 to ensure OGP is well positioned to respond to increased demand and be more ambitious in the coming years. The second part of that strategic refresh now involves taking a hard look at OGP’s rules of the game to ensure they are incentivising the progress on open government reform that the partnership was set up to catalyse.
The refresh of the rules of the game will be a participatory process. We will be asking OGP governments and civil society participants for their views on what problems they see with the current model, and what suggestions they have for future improvements. This started late last year with the agreement of new OGP Participation and Co-Creation StandardsCollaboration between government, civil society and other stakeholders is at the heart of the OGP process. The Participation and Co-Creation Standards are intended to support this collaboration throug..., which have been launched in time to inform the 2017 OGP action plans. These make OGP requirements more specific and easy to follow, introduce a stronger focus on the quality of engagement between government and civil society, and provide guidance on the ongoing dialogue in all phases of the OGP cycle.
There are four distinct areas the Steering Committee and Support Unit have identified for consultation. First is the OGP Response Policy, which was established two years ago to uphold the values and principles of the partnership when core open government principles are under threat in OGP countries. The policy has led the OGP Steering Committee to review complaints filed against several countries, including Azerbaijan, which is now in inactive status in OGP pending improvements to the operating environment for civil society in the country, and Hungary, which voluntarily decided to leave OGP in December 2016. The learning from two years of implementing the Response PolicyThe Response Policy is used when an OGP participating country appears to be taking actions that undermine the values and principles of OGP, as articulated in the Open Government Declaration, in a way ... now needs to be reviewed, and if necessary, changes should be made to ensure that it is tightly focused on the most egregious cases of closing civic space in OGP countries. In addition, it must provide accompanying technical support necessary to help governments improve where there is interest in doing so.
The second area is the OGP National Action PlanAction plans are at the core of a government’s participation in OGP. They are the product of a co-creation process in which government and civil society jointly develop commitments to open governmen... cycle, which makes up the core of any government’s participation in the partnership. This includes the eligibility criteria that determines who can join OGP; the level of ambitionAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, OGP commitments should “stretch government practice beyond its current baseline with respect to key areas of open government.” Ambition captures the po... in co-creation between government and civil society, and how to incentivise more ambition in National Action Plans. Some governments have also expressed concerns about the length of the action plan calendar and the burden of producing regular self-assessment reports. These considerations will need to be balanced to update what the core expectations of OGP participation are in the future.
Third, the Steering CommitteeThe Steering Committee is OGP’s executive decision-making body. Its role is to develop, promote and safeguard OGP’s values, principles and interests; establish OGP’s core ideas, policies, and ru... will examine the review process for when governments act contrary to OGP process. Currently, the Criteria and Standards subcommittee of the OGP Steering Committee reviews the participation of OGP countries who have acted contrary to OGP process for two consecutive action plan cycles. This has resulted in a growing number of reviews in recent years.
Finally, the Independent Reporting Mechanism will be conducting its own refresh to review its effectiveness and efficiency following the adoption of OGP’s strategic refresh. This will include how the IRM can cope with OGP’s continued growth, how to improve strategic communications of findings, and how to ensure that IRM reports lead to greater ambition and implementation in subsequent National Action Plans. Members of the greater OGP community will be invited to provide feedback to the IRM as part of this refresh.
The four areas of review amount to a thorough housekeeping check on OGP’s internal rules and procedures to ensure they support the implementation of open government reforms that address critical challenges facing society today. The final package of changes will be tabled for approval at an OGP ministerial Steering Committee meeting in September, 2017.
We are open to feedback if any major items are missing, and look forward to input and advice from the community over the coming months. This refresh of OGP’s Rules of the Game is one element of a broader plan to implement the Strategic Refresh, where we are simultaneously focusing on providing enhanced country support, positioning OGP globally in the present geo-political context, and advancing open government norms across countries.