
Lessons from Reformers: Judicial Officers – Appointment and Accountability
Learn how OGP members are improving meritorious, transparent judicial appointments and judicial accountability and independence.
DK0068, 2019, Digital Governance
DK0069, 2019, Justice
DK0070, 2019, Anti-Corruption
DK0064, 2019, Open Data
DK0065, 2019, Labor
DK0066, 2019, Public Service Delivery
DK0067, 2019, Public Service Delivery
DK0050, 2017, Open Data
DK0051, 2017, E-Government
DK0052, 2017, E-Government
DK0053, 2017, Open Data
DK0054, 2017, Open Data
DK0055, 2017, E-Government
DK0056, 2017, Public Service Delivery
DK0057, 2017, Public Service Delivery
DK0058, 2017, Marginalized Communities
DK0059, 2017, Public Participation
DK0060, 2017, Public Participation
DK0061, 2017, Aid
DK0062, 2017, Anti-Corruption
DK0063, 2017, Fiscal Openness
DK0034, 2014, Public Participation
DK0035, 2014, Anti-Corruption
DK0036, 2014, Anti-Corruption
DK0037, 2014, Capacity Building
DK0038, 2014, Capacity Building
DK0039, 2014, Capacity Building
DK0040, 2014, Capacity Building
DK0041, 2014, Subnational
DK0042, 2014, Private Sector
DK0043, 2014, Public Service Delivery
DK0044, 2014, Civic Space
DK0045, 2014, Open Data
DK0046, 2014, Open Data
DK0047, 2014, Public Participation
DK0048, 2014, Aid
DK0049, 2014, Fiscal Openness
DK0001, 2012, Public Participation
DK0002, 2012, Public Participation
DK0003, 2012, Public Participation
DK0004, 2012, Aid
DK0005, 2012, Public Participation
DK0006, 2012, Public Participation
DK0007, 2012, Public Participation
DK0008, 2012, Open Data
DK0009, 2012, Open Data
DK0010, 2012, Public Participation
DK0011, 2012, Capacity Building
DK0012, 2012, Marginalized Communities
DK0013, 2012, Capacity Building
DK0014, 2012, Fiscal Openness
DK0015, 2012, E-Government
DK0016, 2012, Private Sector
DK0017, 2012, Private Sector
DK0018, 2012, Human Rights
DK0019, 2012, Human Rights
DK0020, 2012, Private Sector
DK0021, 2012, Human Rights
DK0022, 2012, Anti-Corruption
DK0023, 2012, Open Parliaments
DK0024, 2012, E-Government
DK0025, 2012, Public Service Delivery
DK0026, 2012, Public Service Delivery
DK0027, 2012, Aid
DK0028, 2012, Public Service Delivery
DK0029, 2012, E-Government
DK0030, 2012, E-Government
DK0031, 2012, Capacity Building
DK0032, 2012, Public Participation
DK0033, 2012, Public Participation
2016, Report Comments, Web page
2013, Action Plan, Web page
2015, Action Plan, Web page
2017, Action Plan, Web page
2020, Action Plan, Web page
2019, Report Comments, Web page
2019, IRM Report, Web page
2020, IRM Report, Web page
2020, Report Comments, Web page
2017, IRM Report, Web page
2017, Report Comments, Web page
2017, Self Assessment, Web page
2020, Self Assessment, Web page
2020, IRM Report, Web page
2020, Report Comments, Web page
2015, IRM Report, Web page
2016, IRM Report, Web page
2017, Letter, Web page
2018, Self Assessment, Web page
2015, Self Assessment, Web page
2020, Resource, Web page
2016, Letter, Web page
2017, Letter, Web page
2017, Letter, Web page
2017, Letter, Web page
2017, Letter, Web page
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.
No IRM data
Pending IRM Review
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.
Stars (Global average 7%)
Focus on implementation
Focus on design
Pending IRM review
No IRM data
Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)
Focus on relevance to open government
Focus on verifiability
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.
Participation was closed
Participation was open to any interested party
No IRM data
Forum
Pending IRM review
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
The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.
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.
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.
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.
Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
IRM-Based Findings
Learn how OGP members are improving meritorious, transparent judicial appointments and judicial accountability and independence.
Read how OGP members are improving transparency and public oversight of their penitentiary systems
The Nordics top the rankings on good governance, showing strong institutions, rule of law, and high levels of public trust See what they're doing in OGP.
Los cuatro países nórdicos, Dinamarca, Noruega, Suecia y Finlandia, se incorporaron a Open Government Partnership (OGP) con una línea base de apertura y transparencia muy alta. Estos países ocupan los primeros lugares en las clasificaciones de buena gobernanza, instituciones sólidas,…
Lessons from Reformers: Along with Denmark, Slovakia was one of the first countries to publish beneficial ownership information.
Lecciones de Los Reformadores: Junto con Dinamarca, Eslovaquia fue uno de los primeros países en publicar información sobre los beneficiarios reales.
Leçons à Tirer des Réformateurs : Le Danemark et la Slovaquie étaient parmi les premiers pays à publier des informations sur la propriété effective.
This year has been a gruesome reminder of the high costs that come with unveiling corruption...
Este año ha sido un terrible recordatorio de los costos que implica la corrupción...
Click here for more information about the Open Government Partnership's terms of use.
Terms & Conditions Close