Preparation of pilot implementation of modern deliberative mechanisms (CZ0044)

1. What problem does the commitment aim to address?

Citizen trust in politicians and public administration is at its lowest level since the Czech Republic was restored. 2 In European comparison, the Czech Republic is among the countries with lower levels of public trust in national Governments (see OECD (2024): OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions - 2024 Results). Polarization and radicalization of society is on the rise. The general public feels alienated and unable to influence public affairs in any way. The citizens’ assembly is an effective instrument of deliberative democracy for addressing these challenges and, in comparison to other countries (Germany, France, Ireland, Poland, etc.) it is not yet used in the Czech Republic.

2. What are the causes of the problem?

A citizens’ assembly is a method of informed decision-making on public issues where citizens representing different sections of society work out solutions within a well-defined process. The growing complexity of societal problems and the associated complexity of their solutions have no solution in simple populist proposals. Deliberative tools allow for effective debate and a joint search for solutions that respect the rights and needs of most parts of society. Czech society is not yet used to finding solutions in deliberative processes. In the world, these mechanisms are used both for decisions with very fundamental ethical and ideological implications (e.g. allowing euthanasia, access to abortion) and for issues that affect the lives of a large part of society on a daily basis (housing, transport, climate protection, etc.) Strong support for consultative, participatory and deliberative processes is also evident from the European Union - see for example COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society organisations in public policymaking processes (C/2023/8627).

Commitment Description

1. What has been done so far to solve the problem?

It has not yet been systematically addressed. According to the OECD recommendations in the Public Governance Reviews: Czech Republic, 20233 , despite partial progress (e.g. in the participation of the non-profit sector), the Czech Republic still has no experience with deliberation at the national level.

2. What solution are you proposing?

The aim is to prepare the conditions for the implementation of at least one modern deliberative process at national level. In the case of a successful pilot test, to specify recommendations on how to implement similar tools systematically in decision-making practice in the Czech Republic. The choice of the deliberative tool has not yet been made. Most likely it could be a citizens' assembly (Members of the citizens' assembly are selected by a lot based on demographic criteria such as age, gender, place of residence, social status, or relationship to the issue under discussion. This temporarily creates a miniature of the community in question, which has legitimacy in the eyes of the public. The role of the CA is to conduct a thorough analysis of the specific problem or dilemma, discuss different solutions, weigh the respective advantages and disadvantages, and finally reach a well-thought-out decision based on mutual consensus), or a citizens' panel (a simplified and faster version of a citizens' assembly), or a citizens' jury (A citizens' jury is usually a one-off event where representatives of the public take a common position on a presented problem or project. The aim is to provide the responsible political representation or officials with a societal perspective on a particular issue). The commitment is directed towards the preparation of a deliberative instrument. The total estimated cost of the preparation is approximately 0.5 million CZK. It is expected to be covered by external project resources.

3. What results do we want to achieve by implementing this commitment?

• To support the implementation of a deliberative tool that enables effective and direct participation of the public and other non-state actors in finding solutions to socially important issues • Increase in the public confidence in the democratic system.

Commitment Analysis
1. How will the commitment promote transparency? How will it help improve citizens’ access to information and data? How will it make the Government more transparent to citizens?
Modern deliberative tools and processes are primarily designed to be highly inclusive and transparent. The commitment focuses on preparing the implementation of one of the deliberative tools. Already in the preparation phase, procedures and sub-processes need to be clearly defined to ensure a fully transparent process while defining the conditions and rules for partnership work in a safe environment.

2. How will the commitment help foster accountability? How will it help public agencies become more accountable to the public? How will it facilitate citizens’ ability to learn how the implementation is progressing? How will it support transparent monitoring and evaluation systems?
The opportunity for citizens and other stakeholders to be involved in the solution of a specific public problem leads to increased accountability both on the part of the general public (they are involved, support the adopted solution and at the same time feel co-responsible for its implementation) and on the part of the public administration, which gains practical experience of direct interaction with the involvement of the general public and other stakeholders.

3. How will the commitment improve citizen participation in defining, implementing, and monitoring solutions? How will it proactively engage citizens and citizen groups?
The commitment is aimed at direct involvement of the general public and other stakeholders in finding solutions to public policy issues.

Commitment Planning
Milestones | Expected Outputs | Expected Completion Date

Preparatory phase: Setting up cooperation | 1-2 meetings with ministries and other central administrative authorities and NGOs/experts 1 external expert involved | 08/2025

Implementation phase: Preparation of an innovative deliberative instrument at national level | Identification and analysis of the problem to be solved Creation of a set of implementation methodological materials, on the basis of which it will be possible to start piloting the application of the chosen method | 10/2026

Final phase: Evaluation of the implementation of the measures and proposal for further action in with the central Government authorities involved | 1-2 meetings with ministries and other central administrative authorities and NGOs | 12/2026