More Open and Transparent Law-Making (EE0043)

Description of the current situation or problem resolved through the commitment Lobbying is a normal part of democratic decision-making processes, but concealed lobbying reduces democracy. Even though lobbying is not regulated by laws in Estonia, the studies carried out clearly refer to a need for rules. The public as well as decision-makers should have a clearer understanding of who submitted the amendment proposals or who is behind an expert opinion. Clear lobbying rules, i.e. representing interest groups must be set out. Amendments to the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act (13.04.2016, RT I, 03.05.2016, 2) have been passed, with which the minutes of the sittings of committees are made significantly more substantial and open. In addition, interest groups in the matter concerned that were engaged in the preparation of the draft and that wish to participate in the draft discussion are invited to engage in the draft discussion. It is important to check that these amendments are taken into account. Main aim Supplementing and implementing the citizen-centred and open law-making process Short description of the commitment (max 140 characters) Developing lobbying rules and principles of representation of interests for members of the Riigikogu for increasing the openness of law-making, creation of the respective self-regulation mechanism as a code of good practice. Implementing open law-making and strengthening engagement practice. Monitoring the minutes of the committees’ sittings (§ 39) and the part of the participation of interest groups (§ 36) on compliance with the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act.

Commitment 5: More open and transparent law-making

Commitment Text:

Developing lobbying rules and principles of representation of interests for members of the Riigikogu for increasing the openness of law-making, creation of the respective self-regulation mechanism as a code of good practice. Implementing open law-making and strengthening engagement practice.

Monitoring the minutes of the committees’ sittings (§39) and the part of the participation of interest groups (§36) on compliance with the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act.

Milestones:

5.1. Supplementing the handbook of the member of the Riigikogu “Good practice of the member of the Riigikogu”

5.2. Developing the lobbying rules / good practice of representation of interests of a member of the Riigikogu (engaging interest groups) and adding rules to the handbook of the member of the Riigikogu

5.3. Implementation of the engagement practice and open law-making process according to the new wording of the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act.

Responsible Institution: Riigikogu

Supporting Institutions: Transparency International Estonia, Open Government Partnership Roundtable, parties related to representing interests

Start Date: 1 July 2016           

 End Date: 30 June 2018

Commitment Aim

This commitment sought to increase transparency in the lawmaking process of the Parliament of Estonia (the Riigikogu) by updating the handbook of Riigikogu members with a code of good practice for engaging lobby groups. It also called for amending the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act based on these updates.

Status

Midterm: Substantial

To implement the commitment, the Anti-Corruption Select Committee of the Riigikogu handed its proposal for amending the Good Practice of the Members of the Riigikogu to the Parliament’s Council of Elders (chairpersons of the parliament’s factions) in May 2017. However, Parliament rejected the proposal to amend the Good Practice. Instead, on 29 May 2017, the Riigikogu approved another type of document, the “Recommendations of the Anti-Corruption Select Committee to the Members of the Riigikogu for Interaction with Interest Representatives.” This document included eight general recommendations^{[Note 37: The document included the following recommendations: 1) when meeting with interest representatives, check what interests they represent and who is funding them; 2) Request interest representatives to disclose, in writing and in advance, the purpose of the meeting, names of participants, the issue for discussion, and any relevant background information; 3) Before the discussion of a particular bill or a topic at the committee sitting, inform the members of the committee that you have been contacted by an interest representative and ask it to be entered in the minutes of the committee sitting; 4) Assess any risk of conflicts between your private interests and the public interest and how your interaction might be perceived; 5) Err on the side of caution. If in doubt, consult somebody, and if you decide to go ahead, add an explaining note to the documents; 6) Invite interested representatives to substantiate statements or presentations in writing after meetings or telephone calls; 7) Maintain good record-keeping habits, including recording the date and location of the meeting, names of participants and issues discussed; and 8) Report unacceptable lobbying practices to the Anti-Corruption Select Committee. See the full recommendations at https://www.riigikogu.ee/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Recommendations-of-the-Anti-Corruption-Select-Committee-to-the-members-of-the-Riigikogu-for-interaction-with-interest-representatives.pdf  ]} and example cases helping members of the Riigikogu (MPs) assess potential conflict of interest and ethical issues in preparing legislation and coordinating with interest groups.

End of term: Substantial

Since 29 May 2017, the Riigikogu has not carried out any specific activities related to this commitment. Although the first two milestones were implemented in a different format than originally planned, both had been completed by the midterm to the extent possible under the circumstances. However, the completion of milestone 5.3 (implementation of the adopted guidelines and recommendation) is difficult to assess due to the lack of verifiable information as to whether or how MPs actually implement the recommendations in their daily practices. The government’s end of term self-assessment report evaluates the commitment as “substantially” but not fully completed.

According to Tiina Runthal from the Chancellery of the Riigikogu,^{[Note 38: Tiina Runthal (Chancellery of Riigikogu), interview by IRM researcher, 26 November 2018]} Parliament took the following measures to support the recommendations’ implementation:

·       The recommendations^{[Note 39: See https://www.riigikogu.ee/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Recommendations-of-the-Anti-Corruption-Select-Committee-to-the-members-of-the-Riigikogu-for-interaction-with-interest-representatives.pdf ]} and examples^{[Note 40: See https://www.riigikogu.ee/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Case-examples-of-possible-situations-where-there-is-a-conflict-of-interests.pdf ]} have been published on the Riigikogu website;^{[Note 41: See https://www.riigikogu.ee/en/parliament-of-estonia/committees/anti-corruption-select-committee/ ]}

·       The recommendations are included in the package of rules and codes of conduct that are always introduced to new members of the Parliament as they start their work;

·       In case the Board of the Riigikogu receives information about cases of non-compliance with the recommendations, e.g., through MPs’ declarations of economic interest, information from other MPs, or via the media, the board will take the case to the Council of the Elders to discuss the need to change or to update the recommendations.

According to Tiina Runthal, no cases of noncompliance have been given to the Board of the Riigikogu so far.^{[Note 42: Tiina Runthal (Chancellery of Riigikogu), interview by IRM researcher, 26 November 2018]} It is not clear whether the lack of reported cases is a result of MP’s full compliance with the recommendations or whether it is due to limited awareness of the recommendations. No verifiable information about the MPs’ actual awareness of the recommendations is available, as Parliament has not conducted surveys to learn about the awareness level.

Did It Open Government?

Access to information: Did not change

Civic participation: Did not change

Public accountability: Did not change

The commitment aimed to address the problem of lack of transparency and public oversight of lobbying activities in the law-making process that organizations such as Transparency International Estonia had previously raised in reports. According to the original wording of the commitment, the Riigikogu committed to creating a self-regulation mechanism that would provide decision-makers and the general public better information on who and how has shaped the legislative bills in the Parliament. Though this commitment is a positive first step toward regulating the influence of special interest groups in the decision-making process, the IRM Progress Report assessed it as not directly relevant to the core OGP values. The report noted that a significant change in lawmaking practices and MPs’ interaction with lobby groups would require including actual enforcement mechanisms of the lobbying regulations.

According to the government’s self-assessment report and evidence from Riigikogu, no such enforcement or redress mechanisms were created during the project’s implementation. Transparency International Estonia suggests that this commitment is a step in the right direction, but a more thorough and legally binding set of lobbying rules is needed to increase the actual transparency of MPs’ interactions with lobbyists.^{[Note 43: IRM researcher’s email communication with Transparency International Estonia, 30 November 2018]} It recommend that Riigikogu follow “International Standards for Lobbying Regulation”^{[Note 44: “International Standards for Lobbying Regulation” (2015), Transparency International, Access Info Europe, Sunlight Foundation and Open Knowledge. Accessible at http://lobbyingtransparency.net/lobbyingtransparency.pdf. ]} when designing further lobbying regulation mechanisms. Therefore, despite the initial ambitions, the commitment has had no effect on opening government. The potential effects are further reduced by the lightweight non-binding format of the recommendations and the lack of proactive promotion efforts of the guidelines among the Riigikogu members.

Carried Forward?

This commitment has been carried forward to Estonia’s fourth action plan. Commitment 3 of the 2018–2020 action plan (“Increasing the openness and transparency of the Riigikogu”) continues to advance the goal of an open and transparent law-making process by focusing on two main strands of activities: 1) releasing data about the Parliament’s plenary meetings as machine-readable open data and 2) harmonizing the publication practice and speeding up the process of publishing parliamentary committees’ meeting proceedings on Riigikogu’s website.