Develop a Number of Administrative Services On-Line (TN0009)

Based on a participatory approach through the organization of online consultation, a list of the administrative services that are much used by citizens and that can be automated will be drawn.
This list will include e-services with different maturity level (Informative, interactive and fully integrated services) that covers the needs of different administration users (citizens, businesses, public servants, foreigners,...).
Developing online services will certainly enhance the public sector transparency, reduce corruption and support the participatory approach.

9: Online administrative services

Commitment Text: Based on a participatory approach through the organization of online consultation, a list of the administrative services that are much used by citizens and that can be automated will be drawn.

This list will include e-services with different maturity level (Informative, interactive and fully integrated services) that covers the needs of different administration users (citizens, businesses, public servants, foreigners,…).

Developing online services will certainly enhance the public sector transparency, reduce corruption and support the participatory approach.

Responsible Institution(s): The Secretariat of State in Charge of Governance and Civil Service (e-Gov Unit)

Start Date: July 2014 End Date: June 2016

Commitment aim

This commitment intended to provide new online services to limit the corruption occurring from extensive regulations and inefficient administrative procedures. The digitisation of public services could diminish the discretionary authority of public servants and help reduce the opportunities for bribery between citizens and civil servants.

Status

Midterm: Not started

Between 2000 and 2014, the government launched several online services, such as import and export procedures, social security payments, and tax filings. At the writing of the midterm report, the IRM researcher could not obtain evidence to ascertain the completion level for the commitment. According to an interview conducted by the IRM researcher on 9 September 2015 with government officials,^{[Note 33: Meeting of the IRM researcher with officials on 9 September 2016.]} no budget had been allocated for the implementation of the commitment. Furthermore, there was no evidence of an online consultation with citizens.

End of term: Not started

OGP contacts^{[Note 34: Interview with OGP focal point team members Rim Garnaoui and Chiraz Ben Tahar, 9 September 2016.]} in Tunisia stated that there was no progress on the implementation of this commitment.

Did it open government?

Access to information: Did not change

Civic participation: Did not change

By involving civil society and the business community in the process of identifying which services to prioritise for digitisation, the government may have enhanced the quality of citizen-government interaction and improved government’s performance. However, for greater impact, the commitment had to be more specific. Since the commitment was not started, it did not contribute in any way to open government. 

Carried forward?

This commitment was not carried forward to the second action plan.