Faces of Open Gov: Laima Letiņa
Meet Laima Letiņa, Director General to the Register of the Enterprises in Latvia, responsible for developing the country's framework for beneficial ownership transparency.
Current Action Plan
2021-2025
Action Plan 5
- Number of Commitments: 6
- Policy Area Focus: Not specified
In February 2022, Latvia submitted a four-year action plan to the Open Government Partnership. At the midpoint, Latvia took stock of the action plan’s progress and context after two years of implementation. Based on this reflection, Latvia submitted a refreshed action plan in July 2024. This IRM document reviews the refreshed action plan, the status of implementation at the midpoint, and alignment with the minimum requirements under the Participation & Co-Creation Standards. (More)
Four Steps Towards Fiscal Openness
The OGP Nordic+ group met in April 2024 and again during Open Gov Week to discuss how to advance fiscal transparency and enhance participation in fiscal policy. From these discussions, four key lessons emerged, each illustrated with practical examples from various countries.
Blowing the Whistle on Corruption in Latvia
In this Voices of Open Government episode, we explore the systems in place to safeguard the identities of government employees, activists, civil society organizers and other individuals who blow the whistle on illicit activities.
Contact
Point of Contact
Inese Kušķe
Consultant, Department For Public Administration Policy, State Chancellery
inese.kuske@mk.gov.lv
Resources
-
Latvia Midterm Review 2021-2025
2024, IRM Report, Web page
-
Fiscal Openness in Nordic+ Fact Sheet (June 2024)
2024, Research Product, Web page
-
Bringing Organized Interest Groups into Decision-Making
2023, Guidance Document, Web page
-
Latvia Action Plan Review 2022-2025
2022, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Action Plan Review 2022-2025 – For Public Comment
2022, Report Comments, Web page
-
Latvia Transitional Results Report 2019-2021
2022, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Transitional Results Report 2019-2021 – For Public Comment
2022, Report Comments, Web page
-
Latvia – Contrary to Process Letter (February 2022)
2022, Letter, Web page
-
Latvia Action Plan 2021-2025 (December)
2022, Action Plan, Web page
-
Nordic+ Fact Sheet (August 2021)
2021, Research Product, Web page
-
Latvia Design Report 2019-2021
2020, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Design Report 2019–2021 – For Public Comment
2020, Report Comments, Web page
-
Latvia Implementation Report 2017-2019
2020, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Implementation Report 2017-2019 – For Public Comment
2020, Report Comments, Web page
-
Latvia Action Plan 2019-2021
2020, Action Plan, Web page
-
Latvia Design Report 2017-2019
2019, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Design Report 2017-2019 – For Public Comment
2019, Report Comments, Web page
-
Implementing SDG16+ Through the Open Government Partnership
2019, Perspective, Web page
-
Latvia End-of-Term Report 2015-2017
2018, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia End-of-Term Report 2015-2017 – For Public Comment
2018, Report Comments, Web page
-
Latvia 2017 Late SAR Letter – February 2018
2018, Letter, Web page
-
OGP Letter – Latvia – November 2017
2017, Letter, Web page
-
Latvia National Action Plan 2017-2019
2017, Action Plan, Web page
-
Latvia Mid-Term Progress Report 2015-2017
2017, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Letter of Intent to Join OGP
2017, Letter, Web page
-
Latvia Mid-Term Progress Report 2015-2017 – For Public Comment
2017, Report Comments, Web page
-
Latvia Mid-Term Self-Assessment 2015-2017
2017, Self Assessment, Web page
-
Latvia IRM Report 2012 – Public Comments Received
2016, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Action Plan 2012
2015, Action Plan, Web page
-
Latvia IRM Progress Report 2012-2013
2015, IRM Report, Web page
-
Latvia Self Assessment Report 2013 (English)
2015, Self Assessment, Web page
-
Latvia National Action Plan 2015-2017
2015, Action Plan, Web page
Commitment Performance
The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.
Key
No IRM data
Pending IRM Review
How to Get More Starred Commitments
Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.
Key
Stars (Global average 7%)
Focus on implementation
Focus on design
Pending IRM review
No IRM data
Focus on design
Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)
Focus on relevance to open government
Focus on verifiability
Public Participation
This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.
Key
Participation was closed
Participation was open to any interested party
No IRM data
Forum
Pending IRM review
Definitions
Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda
Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs
Consult: Public gave input
Inform: Government provided public with information on plan
OGP Global Report Data
The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.
Selected Dimensions of Open Government
This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.
Action implications
These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.
IRM-based findings
Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.
(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.
Third-party scores
Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.
Anti-Corruption
Action
Implication
Implication
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
Third-Party
Score (0-4)
Score (0-4)
Civic Space
Action
Implication
Implication
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
Third-Party
Score (0-4)
Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Open Policy Making
Action
Implication
Implication
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
Third-Party
Score (0-4)
Score (0-4)
Access to Information
Action
Implication
Implication
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
Third-Party
Score (0-4)
Score (0-4)
Fiscal Openness
Action
Implication
Implication
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
Third-Party
Score (0-4)
Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Recent Posts
Faces of Open Gov: Laima Letiņa
Meet Laima Letiņa, Director General to the Register of the Enterprises in Latvia, responsible for developing the country's framework for beneficial ownership transparency.
Shaping the Future: Advancing Collective Action for Impactful Beneficial Ownership Transparency
This blog post was originally posted on Open Ownership’s website. Read the original post here. The International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC), hosted by the Government of Lithuania in June 2024, gathered practitioners from around the globe to discuss and advance action…
Scotland, United Kingdom ·
Norway ·
Finland ·
Denmark ·
Netherlands ·
Estonia ·
Latvia ·
Lithuania ·
Sweden ·
Germany
Four Steps Towards Fiscal Openness
The OGP Nordic+ group met in April 2024 and again during Open Gov Week to discuss how to advance fiscal transparency and enhance participation in fiscal policy. From these discussions, four key lessons emerged, each illustrated with practical examples from various countries.
Beneficial Ownership Leadership Group: Impact, Achievements, and Future Directions
Launched in 2019, the Beneficial Ownership Leadership Group (or the Leadership Group) set out to advance global policy toward open beneficial ownership (BO) data, and achieve concrete progress by 2023. This summary examines the group's achievements, lessons learned by Open Ownership and the Open Government Partnership from co-convening the group, and future directions to advance BO reform.
Reflections from the OGP Leaders Network Pilot Program
Reflexiones del programa piloto de la Red de líderes de OGP
The OGP Leaders Network Program Over the years, OGP has evolved as a prominent platform for thematic reform and ambition, and initiatives like the OGP Leaders Network (2020-2021) have catalyzed thematic leadership across the Partnership. The Leaders Network was designed…
Programa de la Red de líderes de OGP A lo largo de los años, OGP ha evolucionado como una plataforma destacada para la reforma temática y la ambición. Iniciativas como la Red de líderes de OGP (2020-2021) han catalizado el liderazgo temático…