Download the file - United Nations Rule of Law

impact of a proposed action on some importantpublic value before the agency takes action.The most common legislation of this type is the‘environmental impact statement’ requirementpioneered by the U.S. National EnvironmentalPolicy Act of 1970 and adopted by numerousother countries and some international organisations.Though the specifics of these laws vary,they all require that agencies prepare a report onthe impact of major proposed actions on environmentalquality. Other types of impact statementrequirements have also been proposed, and afew have been implemented, though the environmentalimpact statement is still by far the mostcommon version of this strategy. One approachthat might be worth considering is the use of a‘poverty impact statement’ that would requireagencies, after consulting the poor community, toproduce a report on how their initiatives are likelyto affect the poor. The main advantages of impactstatement laws are, first, that they increasepublic accountability and the efficacy of externaloversight by disclosing potential adverse effectsof agency action, and, second, that they mayalter the agency’s own internal decision-makingprocess by drawing attention to issues that mightotherwise be ignored or neglected. However, impactstatement requirements, like FOI legislation,can be burdensome, especially for under-fundedor low-capacity agencies. Saddling bureaucracieswith too many impact statement requirementsmay induce ‘paralysis by analysis’. The appropriatebalance between these competing interestscannot be resolved in abstract or general terms.Whistleblower protection statutes are a thirdform of administrative law reform that seeks toimprove transparency and political accountability.Without credible protections, individuals withina bureaucratic organisation who learn about corruptionor other forms of malfeasance will be reluctantto come forward because they fear retaliation.Effective whistleblower protection statutestypically enable individuals to make complaintsanonymously or confidentially, imposing seriouscivil and criminal penalties on those who retaliateagainst whistleblowers, and (sometimes) givingpotential whistleblowers a financial incentive tocome forward either by offering them a set ‘bounty’for useful information or by offering them apercentage of any money the government recoversfrom wrongdoers as a result of the whistleblower’sreport. Whistleblower protection statutes may notbe effective in redressing endemic or high-levelcorruption, especially when the enforcement ofthe laws is unreliable, but these statutes maynonetheless be effective and important elementsof a broader anti-corruption strategy.Judicial Review of Administrative DecisionsFOI legislation, impact statement laws, andwhistleblower protection statutes are all legalmechanisms through which courts enforce rulesthat enable other actors — NGOs, politicians, andthe media — to monitor bureaucratic performancemore effectively. Thus, increasing the abilityof individuals and groups to make sure these lawsare enforced may improve poor people’s access tobureaucratic justice.Litigation and judicial institutions may also play amore direct role in ensuring bureaucratic accountability.Such litigation can take two main forms.First, some litigants pursue what might be termed‘oversight’ litigation. Individuals who believe thata government agency has taken, or is about totake, some illegal action that adversely affectstheir interests may file a legal challenge. The judiciarythen assumes the role of public monitor,ensuring that the agency has acted lawfully.The second form of litigation is so-called ‘publicinterest litigation’ (PIL). Citizen groups typically54