GOLD Report I - UCLG

157has sometimes usefully turned to internationalinstruments and used them toraise public awareness and mobilize campaigns.This happened with the AarhusConvention, and more recently with theenvironmental impact study plans andprograms following the European CommunityDirective of 2001. The real impactof these procedures on public participatoryprocesses is difficult to assess. Particularlyin light of the circumstances andsituations where non-compliance of proceduresleads to the annulment of thedecisions already taken, thus providingcitizens with a more realistic appreciationof the room for participatory maneuverand its subsequent bearing on the decision-makingprocess.Progress in the area of citizens’ right to informationshould not be forgotten either. Thisdoes not just concern the publication of localpublic records. It also speaks to the right ofaccess to administrative documents, whichis an essential condition for transparency inlocal government. Europe has Sweden tothank for the widespread recognition of thisprinciple. Although it has not been implementedin the systematic way seen in Sweden,improved access to local governmentdata does give citizens, associations and themedia a more complete picture of the workingsof their administration. This is, of course,a prerequisite for effective participationand supervision by civil society. Over thepast few years, several Central and EasternEuropean countries have passed legislationto improve public access to administrativedocuments, most recently and particularlythe Czech Republic and Slovak Republic. TheUnited Kingdom also recently adopted sucha law, The Freedom of Information Act.One related development is the advent ofelectronic administration in all the Europeancountries. This trend is not restricted tolocal authorities, and has several aspects 19 .The most important relates to the authorities’intention to simplify administrativeprocedures. The de-materialization of thepublic markets illustrates the potentialinformation technology has for improvingadministrative procedures. One factor inhibitingmore computerization of proceduresis the need for increased computer securityto protect personal data. In many casesthis need for confidentiality prevents electronicproduction and distribution of officialnotices and certificates. With respect tolocal democracy, the Internet serves aneducational function by multiplying thesources of information that citizens canconsult. Of course, it does not guaranteethat relevant information will be madeavailable to them for assessing local managementor policies. That would requireregulations governing what informationshould be made available to citizens, as isthe case in the United Kingdom for performanceindicators.Restrictions, active and passive, still existin some countries on the voting rights ofpart of the population. For example, Latvia,Estonia and Lithuania restrict votingby their Russian-speaking citizens. Suchvoter exclusion is difficult to square withthe European Convention on HumanRights. Conversely, the Netherlands andSweden are extending voting rights to foreignresidents (non-European Union nationals),under certain conditions.IV.3. SupervisionThe supervision of local governments isusually exercised by the state, though infederal states this is usually done by thefederal members and in self-governingregions supervision is at least partially devolvedto the regions.With regard to administrative controls,there is a general tendency to limit theseto legal checks on the lawfulness of actionsand procedures, at least as far as the own(or basic) powers and responsibilities oflocal authorities are concerned. However,one recourse is the “jurisdictionalization”of supervision. This trend is beneficial forlocal self-government. However, a closerconsideration does reveal that in most ofWith regard toadministrativecontrols, there isa general tendencyto limit these tolegal checks on thelawfulnessof actionsand procedures, atleast as far as theown powers andresponsibilities oflocal authoritiesare concerned19. Chatillon, G. / DuMarais, B. (dir.)(2003), Electronicadministration atthe service ofcitizens, Bruxelles,Bruylant.