Skip Navigation

Croatia

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 3

Current Action Plan

2018-2020

Action Plan 3

  • Number of Commitments: 15
  • Policy Area Focus: Beneficial Ownership, Parliamentary Openness, Local and Regional Government Openness

Croatia is currently implementing 15 commitments from their 2018-2020 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to open data, access to information, fiscal transparency and spreading OGP to the local and regional levels.

Point of Contact

Darija Marić Advisor, Office for Cooperation with NGOs, Government of Croatia

Commitments

  1. Implementing Right to Information

    HR0026, 2018, Capacity Building

  2. Fiscal Transparency

    HR0027, 2018, E-Government

  3. Political Finance Transparency

    HR0028, 2018, Capacity Building

  4. Commercial Regulations of Companies Owning Local Governments

    HR0029, 2018, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  5. Transparency in NGO Project Finance

    HR0030, 2018, Capacity Building

  6. Protection of Persons Reporting Corruption

    HR0031, 2018, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  7. Parliamentary Transparency

    HR0032, 2018, E-Government

  8. Media Regulations Framework

    HR0033, 2018, Civic Space

  9. Data Opening

    HR0034, 2018, E-Government

  10. Raising Awareness About Open Data

    HR0035, 2018, Capacity Building

  11. Central State Portal

    HR0036, 2018, E-Government

  12. Public Consultations

    HR0037, 2018, Capacity Building

  13. Implementation of Anti-Corruption Policies by NGOs

    HR0038, 2018, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  14. Local and Regional Open Government

    HR0039, 2018, E-Government

  15. OGP Sustainability

    HR0040, 2018, Capacity Building

  16. Right to Access Information Legislative Framework

    HR0010, 2014, Legislation & Regulation

  17. Improving the Implementation of the Right of Access to Information Act

    HR0011, 2014, Capacity Building

  18. Starred commitment Proactive Release of Information and Opening Data

    HR0012, 2014, Capacity Building

  19. Fiscal Transparency

    HR0013, 2014, Capacity Building

  20. Starred commitment Improvements of Transparency and Efficiency in Public Administration Work

    HR0014, 2014, Capacity Building

  21. Improvement of Transparency of Election and Referendum Campaigns

    HR0015, 2014, E-Government

  22. Transparency in the Area of Youth Policy

    HR0016, 2014, E-Government

  23. Media Transparency

    HR0017, 2014, Civic Space

  24. Improving Transparency of Information on Members of Parliament and Their Work

    HR0018, 2014, Asset Disclosure

  25. Improving Transparency of Data on Assets of Officials

    HR0019, 2014, Asset Disclosure

  26. Starred commitment Improving the Consultation Process with the Interested Public in Legislative Procedures

    HR0020, 2014, Capacity Building

  27. Ensuring the Sustainability of Values and Content of the OGP Initiative

    HR0021, 2014, Capacity Building

  28. Starred commitment Participation in Drafting the New Anti-Corruption Strategy

    HR0022, 2014, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  29. Regulation of Lobbying

    HR0023, 2014, Capacity Building

  30. Improving Efficiency of the Ministry of Interior's Complaints Commission

    HR0024, 2014, Justice

  31. Promoting Civil Participation in the Work of Civil Society Organizations

    HR0025, 2014, Civic Space

  32. Improving the Content and Transparency of Budgetary Documents: Publish and Update the State Budget Proposal

    HR0001, 2012, Fiscal Transparency

  33. Improving Transparency of Business Activity of the Companies of Special State Interest

    HR0002, 2012, Private Sector

  34. Making the Contents of All Budgetary Documents Understandable and Accessible to Citizens

    HR0003, 2012, Fiscal Transparency

  35. Improving Accessibility of Local Budget Contents to the Citizens and the Public: Give Recommendations to Local Units to Publish Budget Documents

    HR0004, 2012, Fiscal Transparency

  36. Starred commitment Improving the Legislative Framework for Exercising the Right of Access to Information: Amend the Act on the Right of Access to Information

    HR0005, 2012, Legislation & Regulation

  37. Starred commitment Improving Access to Information on Expending Public Resources and Contents of Relevant Registers: Implementation of Acts on Political Activity and Campaign Financing

    HR0006, 2012, Civic Space

  38. Ensuring Transparent Work of Public Authority Bodies in the Service of Exercising Citizen Rights: Enhancement of Web Portal with Info on Exercising Rights

    HR0007, 2012, E-Government

  39. Starred commitment Setting up a System of Participatory Drafting and Monitoring of State and Local Budget Implementation: Public Discussions on Budget Allocation

    HR0008, 2012, Participation in Budget Processes

  40. Starred commitment Improving the Practice of Consulting the Interested Public in Procedures of Adopting New Laws: Amend Procedural Rules

    HR0009, 2012, E-Government

Current Data

The data below is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

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

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
4
Action Plan 2
4
3
4
Action Plan 3

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

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

Download
Action Plan 3

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

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3

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.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
New Initiative
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.00 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.73 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.39 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.40 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.56 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.28 Sources
Open Regulations
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
4.00 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.03 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.73 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.50 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.28 Sources
Participation
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.04 Sources
Oversight
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.36 Sources

Resources

  1. Case Study (2013): More inclusive and meaningful public engagement on laws in Croatia

    2013, Research Product, Web page

  2. Case Study (2014): Making election campaign finances public in Croatia

    2014, Research Product, Web page

  3. Croatia – Cohort Shift Letter – January 2018

    2018, Letter, Web page

  4. Croatia Action Plan 2012-2013

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  5. Croatia Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  6. Croatia End of Term Self-Assessment Report 2014-16

    2016, Self Assessment, Web page

  7. Croatia End-of-Term Report 2014-2016

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  8. Croatia IRM Progress Report 2012-2013 (English)

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  9. Croatia IRM Progress Report 2014-2015

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  10. Croatia IRM Report Comments

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  11. Croatia Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  12. Croatia Mid-Term Report 2014-2015 (Croatian)

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  13. Croatia Progress Report 2012-2013 (Croatian)

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  14. Croatia SC Application Letter

    2015, Letter, Web page

  15. Croatia Self-Assessment Report 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  16. Improving Government – Civil Society Interactions within OGP

    2015, Research Product, Web page

  17. Late Letter – November 2016 – Croatia

    2016, Letter, Web page

  18. OGP Letter – Croatia – January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  19. OGP Letter – Croatia – November 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  20. OGP Letter to Croatia Regarding Late Action Plan: November 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  21. OGP Letter to Croatia Regarding Shift to ‘Odd Year’ Action Plan Schedule: January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  22. Open government reforms: The challenge of making public consultations meaningful in Croatia

    2015, Research Product, Web page

  23. Self-Assessment Report – Croatia

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

Recent Posts

Old ruins of castle in Ohrid, Macedonia
Albania · Armenia · Croatia · North Macedonia · Moldova · Serbia · Ukraine

Seven OGP countries addressing assembly

Lessons from Reformers: The European Center for Not-for-profit Law (ECNL), an innovative project on freedom of assembly, assessed seven OGP countries in Central and Eastern Europe for relevant law and practices between 2017 and 2019.

Croatia

Promoting Paris in Zagreb

OGP Steering Committee members Sandra Pernar (Croatian government) and Helen Darbishire (Access Info Europe), were in action last week (10-12 July 2017) meeting with government officials in four ministries, as well as independent agencies, and civil society to promote strong…

Croatia

Make Open Great Again – OGP 2021

It's 2012, I am sitting in the cabinet of the Deputy Foreign Minister Joško Klisovic, with my notebook and a pen on my lap, trying to catch all the new information and tasks at my new job. I am impressed,slightly…

Show More