Guatemala Results Report 2023-2025

Guatemala implemented its sixth action planAction plans are at the core of a government’s participation in OGP. They are the product of a co-creation process in which government and civil society jointly develop commitments to open governmen... in a context of political transition and high institutional turnover, achieving moderate results for most commitments, with greater progress in infrastructure transparencyAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, transparency occurs when “government-held information (including on activities and decisions) is open, comprehensive, timely, freely available to the pub... More and in the prevention of violence against women. Expanding citizen participationAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, citizen participation occurs when “governments seek to mobilize citizens to engage in public debate, provide input, and make contributions that lead to m... More, systematizing processes, and establishing institutional memory are important challenges to consider in the next implementation cycle.

Implementation

Guatemala implemented its sixth action plan, achieving moderate results for most of its commitments. The areas of public infrastructure transparency (CommitmentOGP commitments are promises for reform co-created by governments and civil society and submitted as part of an action plan. Commitments typically include a description of the problem, concrete action... 3) and strengthening mechanisms to prevent violence against women (Commitment 5) achieved the best results.

In the first case, both the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education published tools that allow the public to access information on investment in infrastructure projects within their respective sectors^[1]. Through Commitment 5, the authorities made basic information available regarding allocations to women’s support centers and strengthened the budgets of two key entities responsible for implementing violence prevention policies. In both cases, it will be important to continue working jointly with civil society organizations to formalize spaces for citizen participation; ensure sustainability and improve the quality of published data; and, especially, ensure that this data becomes a key tool in accountability processes.

Five out of six commitments in this plan reached a substantial or complete level of implementation. International cooperation funding was key in enabling implementing entities to carry out the proposed activities.

Regarding the commitments identified as promising in the Action Plan Review, the open data commitment (Commitment 1) did not achieve the creation of the observatory, which at the time had been considered an opportunity to achieve significant results^[2]. Commitment 5, as mentioned above, did have important results.

Participation and Co-Creation

The co-creation process for Guatemala’s sixth action plan was limited to government entities and Technical Committee organizations, without strategies to promote broad citizen participation. Although the website disseminated calendars and invitations, these were not always shared with sufficient advance notice, which generated criticism from civil society^[3]. Representatives indicated that some commitments, such as the prevention of violence against women, did not fully reflect their contributions, as authorities prioritized actions already included in their existing plans^[4].

During implementation, the Multi-Stakeholder Forum continued to operate, although information on agendas and meeting minutes was only available until early 2024. Since the new Government took office, participation by civil society organizations that are members of the Forum has varied depending on each organization’s availability. The subsequent update of the plan sought to broaden territorial inclusion, with a focus on Indigenous peoples, women, and the LGBTIQA+ population. This posed challenges, as many of these groups were not familiar with the scope and purpose of open government initiatives. Although the number of organizations involved increased, the systematization of inputs was not publicly shared, and some stakeholders warned of a loss of previous achievements^[5].

Implementation in Context

During the implementation period of the action plan, a new Government assumed executive power amid delays and controversies surrounding the installation of the Congress of the Republic^[6]. This change led to turnover among technical officials and heads of the institutions that had initiated the implementation process for the commitments.

As a result, the Government and civil society organizations revised the action plan. In some cases, the number of milestones was increased based on progress achieved to date, and in most cases, the number of counterpart organizations increased significantly. Each organization’s involvement in the process, as detailed in this report, depended on its interest in the topic and the availability of resources.

Civil society organizations and the Open Government Directorate — which also underwent its own internal changes — were tasked with reintroducing both the OGP initiative and the agreements reached with their predecessors. This caused delays that prevented the plan from advancing at the pace expected by participating civil society organizations.

This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union.

The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of Open Government PartnershipThe Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a multi-stakeholder initiative focused on improving government transparency, ensuring opportunities for citizen participation in public matters, and strengthen... More and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.