Slovakia Implementation Report 2017-2019
- Action Plan: Slovak Republic National Action Plan 2017-2019
- Dates Under Review: 2017-2019
- Report Publication Year: 2020
Slovakia’s third action plan included commitments on open data, open education and research, participatory policymaking, and transparency measures in the justice sector. While the action plan saw high levels of completion, most of the commitments resulted in minor technical advancements. However, major improvements were seen in judicial transparency, and awareness of whistleblower protection legislation, among other areas.
|Table 1. At a glance
Participating since: 2011
Action plan development
Action plan design
Action plan implementation
*DIOG: Did it Open Governmnt?
The Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a global partnership that brings together government reformers and civil society leaders to create action plans that make governments more inclusive, responsive, and accountable. The Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) monitors all action plans to ensure governments follow through on commitments. Slovakia joined OGP in 2011. Since, Slovakia has implemented three action plans. This report evaluates the implementation of Slovakia’s third action plan.
General overview of action plan
Approximately two-thirds of the commitments in Slovakia’s third action plan (46 of 68) were either substantially or fully completed by the end of the implementation period. This completion rate represented an increase compared to the results of the previous action plan (2015-2017).
While most of the commitments in Slovakia’s third action plan represented minor technical reforms, some achieved major results. For example, Commitment 53 led to the publication of more detailed evaluations of judges’ performances by the Ministry of Justice, and Commitment 57 improved transparency in the selection procedure of judges. Additionally, activities under Commitment 62 have increased public awareness of Slovakia’s Whistleblower Protection Act and the creation of a new public agency dedicated to whistleblower protection.
Table 2. Noteworthy commitments
|Commitment description||Status at the end of implementation cycle.|
|53. Improved publication of assessments of judges||This commitment resulted in the publication of assessments of judges, which compared to previously available evaluations, provide more detailed information about judges’ performances. These evaluations can provide anti-corruption CSOs and investigative journalists with useful information to uncover potential corruption in the judiciary.|
|57. Draft legislation to make selection of judges and judicial staff more transparent||This commitment saw the adoption of amendments to the Act on Judges and Accessors which standardized the selection process for judges and significantly increased the transparency of this process. The new transparency measures have been highly useful in helping to detect potential corruption in the judiciary. These measures could be extended to other judicial staff as well.|
|62. Raise public awareness for the Whistleblower Protection Act||The Office of the Plenipotentiary and civil society organizations conducted various activities to raise public awareness of the 2015 Whistleblower Protection Act. Additionally, new legislation was introduced establishing a public agency for whistleblower protection, transparent election of its head, and the possibility to appeal if protection is not granted. However, by the end of the action plan period, the head of the new agency had not yet been appointed.|
|63. Analyze and evaluate public participation in the drafting and commenting on draft legislation||Under this commitment, the Office of the Plenipotentiary and the Ministry of Justice monitored preliminary information and reports on public participation for six months in 2016. The findings from the analyses have already shed light on where government agencies should improve their practices in publishing preliminary information and reports on public participation.|
Five Key IRM Recommendations
The IRM key recommendations are prepared in the IRM Design Report. They aim to inform the development of the next action plan and guide implementation of the current action plan. In Slovakia’s 2017-2019 Design Report, the IRM recommended the following:
|Establish the formal multi-stakeholder forum with participation of both public servants and civil society.|
|Include more targeted and ambitious commitments in the next action plan.|
|Ensure the proposed commitments are co-created with public agencies in charge of their implementation.|
|Concentrate efforts on existing platforms and initiatives and avoid duplication.|
|Focus on improvement of key transparency tools, including improving the Freedom of Information Act but mainly its application practice.|