Colombia End-of-Term Report 2015-2017
- Action Plan: Colombia, Second Action Plan, 2015-2017
- Dates Under Review: July 2016- June 2017
- Report Publication Year: 2018
- Researcher: José Hernandez-Bonivento
This report was written in Spanish with an English Executive Summary. To see the original report, go to https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Colombia_End-of-Term_Report_2015-2017.pdf
With improved implementation during the second year, Colombia achieved the highest number of starred commitments in an OGP action plan. Challenges going forward include sustaining the momentum and improving the mechanisms for collaborating with civil society in the monitoring committee.
Highlights
| Commitment | Overview | Well-Designed? * | Major or Outstanding Results? ** |
| ✪ 3. Access for people with disabilities | Public information and services will be made available considering the needs of people with disabilities. | Yes | Yes |
| ✪ 4.2 LegalApp | A web portal and a smartphone app will centralize information and other relevant content from the Judiciary. | Yes | Yes |
| ✪ 5. Transparent medicine and health technology | Information will be published and exchanged between doctors, patients and the pharmaceutical industry | Yes | Yes |
| ✪ 16. Transparency and accountability in the Council of State | The Council of State will publish information on its proceedings, resolutions, arguments, appointment of judges, and other relevant topics | Yes | Yes |
| ✪ 17. Historic memory and facts about the armed conflict | Documents on human rights, justice and other aspects of the conflict will be available to the public | Yes | Yes |
* Commitment is evaluated by the IRM as being specific, relevant, and potentially transformative
** Commitment is evaluated by the IRM as having major or outstanding results in terms of the ‘Did it Open Government?’ variable
✪ Commitment is evaluated by the IRM as being specific, relevant, potentially transformative, and substantially or fully implemented
Process
For this action plan, the government expanded the Monitoring Committee and included more CSOs in the consultation process. However, during both the co-creation and implementation stages, CSOs’ level of influence was limited, as most commitments were based on previously planned government activities.
| Did not act contrary to OGP process
A country is considered to have acted contrary to process if one or more of the following occurs:
|
Performance
During the second year of implementation, 76% of commitments were completed, a significant improvement from the first year. Several commitments yielded significant changes in the government’s transparency practices. Colombia received seven starred commitments, the highest in an OGP action plan.
Leave a Reply