Skip Navigation

Guatemala Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

This report was written in Spanish with an English Executive Summary. To see the original report, go to

The political context in Guatemala continues to influence commitment implementation and participation by civil society organizations. The next action plan must increase commitment ambition and address national issues that will contribute to political stability.


Commitment Overview Well-Designed? *
✪ 18. Availability and quality of budget information Address the areas of the Open Budget Index in which Guatemala underperforms with the participation of CSOs. Yes
✪ 20. Actions to advance in fiscal transparency Provide, for the first time, information on tax collection and evasion, a key area for combatting corruption. Yes

* Commitment is evaluated by the IRM as specific, relevant, and has a transformative potential impact
✪ Commitment is evaluated by the IRM as being specific, relevant, potentially transformative, and substantially or fully implemented


Guatemala conducted a broad consultation and co-creation process with participation from the three branches of government and CSOs. However, civil society representation was affected by the decision of six organizations to withdraw from the process after the president decided to declare the head of the CICIG persona non grata. Four of the CSOs have since rejoined the OGP process.

Did not act contrary to OGP process

A country is considered to have acted contrary to process if one or more of the following occurs:

  • The National Action Plan was developed with neither online or offline engagements with citizens and civil society
  • The government fails to engage with the IRM researchers in charge of the country’s Year 1 and Year 2 reports
  • The IRM report establishes that there was no progress made on implementing any of the commitments in the country’s action plan


Guatemala made important progress in implementation during the first year of the action plan. Commitments need to improve in ambition, clearly identify the policy problem they aim to address and ensure consistency between objectives and activities.

IRM Recommendations

  1. Strengthen the open government process as a State initiative
  2. Promote more inclusive participation during the action plan development process
  3. Increase the level of ambition and improve commitment formulation
  4. Delegate responsibility for commitment implementation mainly to government entities
  5. Strengthen efforts between the Executive and Legislative in open government issues


Filed under: IRM IRM Report

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open Government Partnership