Back Issues
THE RILEY REPORT – March 2004
from Thomas B. Riley (Tom@Rileyis.com)
www.rileyis.com
Following is the Riley Report for March
2004. Please feel free to pass this on as you see fit. If you wish to use any or part of the Report in an offline publication please acknowledge the author or contact the author if to be fully republished offline. If you are not currently subscribed to the Riley Report (there is no charge) you can email
info@rileyis.com and simply put subscribe in the body of the text. You can also go to the Riley Report at:
www.rileyis.com/report/index.html and subscribe there.
This month’s Report is a summary of many of the issues on e-Democracy that
were discussed and debated over two days on February 12 and 13 at a European
Union Commission sponsored seminar. The focus of the discussions was on the
nature, development, and the state of e-Democracy at this stage and where it
might go in the future. Presentations and debate revolved around the subject of
e-Participation and e-Voting. A
consistent theme was that e-Democracy could contribute to the reinvigoration and
development of democracy in the world.
This author was a Rapporteur for this Seminar.
This Report combines summaries of the issues.
The comments and speculations on the subject of e-Democracy are solely
those of the author.
The full Report can be found at: www.electronicgov.net/pubs/research_papers/index.shtml
E-Democracy and the
Resurgence of Democracy?
Introduction
On February 12 and 13, 2004, the Egov Unit of the
Information Society Directorate-General, organized and hosted a seminar on
eDemocracy in Brussels, Belgium There
were over 250 experts and practitioners in eDemocracy from across the European
Union and internationally. The
purpose of the seminar was to bring together experts and concerned individuals
and groups to assess the current state of eDemocracy, how it is being practiced,
and what are the implications for democracy in the future, with the goal of
determining what future research is needed to move eDemocracy forward.
The focus of the seminar was how good policies, effective legislation,
wide citizen participation, cooperation between governments, legislative
assemblies and outside groups, such as NGOs (Non-governmental organizations) and
the citizen at large, and information and communication technologies can
reinforce and strengthen democracy.
During the two-day proceedings it was stressed that
e-Democracy can be a significant tool to strengthen democracy, bring people back
into the political process, and assist in resolving complex issues by drawing on
wide portions of the citizenry in respective countries and throughout the
European Union. Other results of
good eDemocracy practices are that it brings accountability and transparency to
government departments and can also contribute to rebuilding citizen trust in
government.
The seminar dealt with two streams: e-Voting and
e-Participation. Each are very
separate but related topics with the primary goal of engaging the citizen in the
democratic process and the process of government. Each of these goals is worthy in themselves, but it has
become clear that countries are at a nascent stage of development in this recent
phenomenon of e-Democracy. Some
smaller jurisdictions have been quite successful in engaging many citizens in
online deliberations, often due to particular officials who have administrative
and political support to enact such programs.
The Internet has created new forms of communications and
information sharing, resulting in global citizens who want to be more engaged in
the affairs of government. However,
at the same instance, there are far more people who use the Internet for
everything from e-Commerce, to online shopping, information sharing, file
sharing, chatting and a host of other activities that rarely involve government
or the political process. This
seminar recognized that there was much to be done to bring citizens into the
online democratic process but that there were many tools and policies available
to reach these goals.
The challenge is to make these goals, set out by the
e-Democracy experts and practitioners, appealing to a wider citizenry, to bring
the aims stated to fruition, and to embrace as much of the population as
possible. Development of
e-Democracy programs by governments will require significant human and financial
resources to conduct e-Voting and e-Consultations.
This will mean restructuring within government to build the back offices
necessary to deal with the changes. Across
the globe many NGOs, civil society groups, academic institutions, organizations
and individual citizens are engaging in e-Democracy through their own
initiatives. The seminar
illustrated many such examples, suggesting there is a growing movement towards
the renewal of democracy.
Issues
One question raised, at different points during the
proceeding, was whether or not e-Democracy will change the nature of democracy
itself and how would this be accomplished.
There was a consensus that the goals of e-Democracy will not be met by
any one particular strata of society though many thought that the process of
e-Democracy should be guided and driven by legislatures as, in the tradition of
representative democracy, these bodies are the drivers of democracy.
Many felt that there should be a separation of consultations, with some
arguing that parliament is the body to conduct them on policy matters, and
others of the belief that political leadership is needed but that
e-Consultations are an important part of the policy making process of public
agencies. Public agencies could
then use the results of such consultations for the development of their
programs, an integral part of their role in government.
It was argued that it was important that while the political system was
the overall driver of the process (i.e. the legislative bodies), nonetheless,
public bodies had a duty to consult with the citizen on behalf of their
political masters or in the execution of their duties as public servants.
The question of engaging large numbers of people in either
e-Voting or e-Participation was a central issue to all of the discussions and
plans about the future of e-Democracy. One
participant remarked that it was important that we not let e-Voting be the
privilege of the few. This is not
just a question of a digital divide between developed and medium-developed and
developing countries or the divides in countries between the various strata of
society. Any process that seeks to
engage the citizenry, whether it is e-Voting or e-Participation in a
consultation process, must ensure that those who are not online are included in
the process, or, if they do not wish to be part of the process, have the
opportunity to do so when he/she chooses.
This theme was central to all the debates as the major
issue is how to get the citizen involved. This
is not just a matter of being online, or having a consultation in process or
easily available on a website, but more a question of creating different comfort
levels for the citizen to participate. This
can range from simple yes or no responses to creating specific spaces for
particular questions enabling citizens to answer within their knowledge and
comfort level. It can sometimes
happen that experts and professionals forget that most people do not begin to
have their level of expertise. However,
many people do have views, not just opinions, on important national and
international issues of the day or on issues that impact their daily lives. One participant from a government ministry stated that it was
important to ensure that someone is designated to summarize and consolidate the
findings of the online consultations which are then published on the government
agency website and, in some cases, for large consultations published in print.
The procedures are important and the publishing of the
results is just as important as it acknowledges that the public consultation was
useful for that agency and not just another report to be tucked away in a drawer
or a database. A universal trait of
online participation is that citizens expect trust and transparency from their
governments when they engage in online deliberations.
There are hundreds of deliberations evolving online that
are outside government or might deal with government policies, programs and
issues but discuss them in the context of the forum in which they are
participating. Interest groups,
associations, public interest groups, research foundations and a host of other
organizations are all part of this democratic process.
e-Democracy is now part of a wider framework though in the area of
e-Voting and e-Participation, in relation to government matters, governments are
still the key players and essentially drive the agenda.
However, this group of players who are engaging citizens from around the
world in wide debate are an important part of the changing nature of democracy
and the growth of e-Democracy. This
continues to be a fluid subject and the role of outside groups is an important
phenomenon of which governments are beginning to take cognizance.
These emerging groups, and individuals, increasingly see themselves as
partners and participants in the process of democracy not necessarily part of
the elected bodies or government departments.
Another point, on the other side of this issue, is the
apathy amongst a large part of the populations who are not inclined to
participate in the democratic process. It
could be argued that e-Democracy tools could be used to bring them back into the
political system, but many leaders of government, such as Prime Minister Blair
of Great Britain, argue that the nature of democracy itself needs to be
reinvigorated. This is a view held
by many, arguing that while technologies might contribute to the renewing and
reinvigorating of democracy, in fact, what is needed is robust debate and
discussion on the nature of democracy and how is it changing in a world that has
seen monumental cultural, scientific, economic and legal shifts in the past two
hundred years. It is already
posited that technology has accelerated the pace of change but that as
technology is simply an instrument of change, and not the result, then it is the
resultant, emerging forces in society that need to be addressed.
Organizations, such as Deliberative Democracy in the United States, are approaching this by building structures and systems to engage as many people as possible in the decision making of issues in government and society overall. Another instrument of change is e-democracy.org in the United States, which is international in its scope in developing e-democracy tools and methodologies to engage the citizen with government, and most importantly, in pushing governments to develop the tools and take wider cognizance of the growing numbers of people who want a more direct input into government. The Institute of Teledemocracy, at Napier University in Edinburgh, Scotland, has developed online engagement tools and works closely with both the Scottish Assembly and the Government on e-Petitions and other forms of online consultations. Another example is in Argentina where an NGO, Democracia Viva is creating a platform to engage the peoples of Latin America in the democratic process and civil affairs outside the political system, and to bring the public in touch with legislators and public officials. The goal of the co-founders of this site is to foster unimpeded citizen dialogue and real time debates. Citizens will be allowed to express their opinions and views directly, thus by-passing the mass media that is often controlled by the government in many countries. The ultimate goal will be to develop channels of communications between politicians and citizens in Latin American countries.
Another aspect of the e-Democracy configuration is the role of the citizen in the process. Many take the position that it is the citizen who is paramount in the e-Participation formula, with others observing that citizens need mechanisms to be able to readily access and participate in the process of government at both the political and government public sector level. This citizen-centric view requires that there be extensive tools to facilitate access to public sector officials and the polity, in the form of information and public documents being made available online, creating online forums in which policy subject matters can be discussed and debated, and allowing the citizen to engage in a wide array of matters from e-Government services to input in policy. Thus, there is no single agreed-upon approach to how e-Democracy will eventually take form, but universal agreement that e-Democracy must be nurtured and developed and that it is subject to constant change as the dynamics of society change and new information and communication technologies are developed.
The polity is responsible for ensuring the public good for all the people not just a privileged few (that could number millions in some countries) who are educated, technologically literate, financially secure and have time to engage in online discourse. Any future research or planning for the development of e-Democracy programs will need to take into account ways and means of including large segments of the population. In fact, this phenomenon cannot really be called a “digital divide” but more a cultural gap amongst the population. 75% of the population in a country might have some form of connection to the Internet but this does not mean all those citizens will be as fully engaged in the culture of politics and civic engagement. The role of democracy, in the best tradition, is to empower the citizen. Currently, in many representative democracy institutions the citizen is less empowered. The new ICTs are tools that can possibly lead to more empowerment of the citizen. This concept must be embedded in every policy or program that is developed if e-Democracy is to reach the potential it promises.
For governments to truly develop this new culture and to
engage the wider citizenry into the democratic process, considerable resources
will be needed. Presentations made
at the seminar on e-Consultations made the case for the importance of political
leadership and support from the higher echelons of government departments and
agencies. But, that is only the
beginning. Beyond the political
will, significant action will be needed to widen the e-Democracy sphere to
encompass a broad swathe of society. Such
a development will have to rely on:
Ø An assessment of what is currently being done,
Ø An analysis of how current policies, practices and technology tools can be improved,
Ø research as to the views of the public on e-Democracy,
Ø how to embrace more professionals into the e-Democracy sphere,
Ø methodologies as to how policies and technology tools can be developed to make the citizen a partner in the process.
Conclusion
As with all public sector programs good governance is the lynchpin for success. Accountability, transparency, ethical financial practices, citizen-centric programs and workable programs are important if e-Democracy is to work. In the case of e-Consultations it is important to have trust in the citizen, allow a wide range of comments and also ensure anonymity when needed. This is often required because the citizen might be disclosing personal information, might feel more secure imparting views in an anonymous setting, might need anonymity for professional reasons and might be more frank in stating views and opinions.
There is a key question continues to be debated:
If Parliament is to be the leader and driver in the e-Democracy movement
how will this be accomplished? Some
have suggested that there should be oversight committees that review budgets,
strategies and programs on e-Government and e-Democracy.
But the development of the e-Democracy world will need to be beyond
national and local parliaments and extended to international bodies working in
this area. The European Commission
might consider partnering with organizations such as the OECD and the United
Nations, on developing international e-Democracy protocols. Both of these organizations have done work in this subject
area but they are only a beginning. As
international organizations and the European Commission have been leaders in a
number of issues such as improving and spreading democracy, human rights, the
environment, data protection, freedom of information, the evolution of
international law, and a host of other important matters that have improved
world conditions, it would be appropriate that partnerships be formed for the
promotion and development of e-Democracy.
Many of the negative aspects of the Internet, hackers, viruses, Trojan horses, back door programs put into computers and a host of other vulnerabilities all need to be addressed. One of the most crucial steps in the e-Democracy movement will be more intense research on the future of this subject. The most central part of this task will be the challenge of asking the right questions to take e-Democracy to its next level of development.
Thomas Riley is available for consultations, preparation of reports, presenting workshops or delivering speeches at conferences and seminars on e-government, e-governance and e-democracy. Please contact me at the email address below for further details.
Thomas B. Riley
Executive Director and Chair
Commonwealth Centre for E-Governance
www.electronicgov.net
Visiting Professor, University of Glasgow
President, Riley Information Services Inc.
www.rileyis.com
Tom@Rileyis.com