Test of public consultation practices
Expert analysis of five draft new laws submitted to the government for approval and the public consultation processes carried out for them. The examples must be approved by the government during the year prior to the latest full calendar year (except those laws that approve or amend the state budget and ratify international agreements).
Points are awarded for each of the following eight criteria, with 3 points awarded if all five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion, 2 points for four of the cases and 1 point for three of the cases (total of 24 points).
Those likely to be affected by the policy changes and other stakeholders were informed in advance that a public consultation was to take place (with information indicating the time of the consultation and the manner in which it would be conducted)
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
Other forms of public consultation were used in addition to written public consultation (e.g. informal discussion, establishment of working groups)
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
Written public consultation respected the minimum duration requirements established by the legal framework
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
Comments were made by at least one organisation
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
The outcome of public consultation was reported on as a part of the documentation submitted with the agenda items for government sessions
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
The report on the outcome of public consultation (as a stand-alone document or part of the explanatory memorandum) was made available to the public online (for written public consultations) or sent to the participants of the consultation exercise (in case of direct consultations)
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
The report on the outcome of public consultation (as a stand-alone document or part of the explanatory memorandum) included explanations for not accepting proposals made by the stakeholders or, in the case of partial acceptance, explanations on which part was accepted and the reasons for not accepting the entire proposal
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |
A document containing the substantiation and analysis behind the elaboration of the draft (e.g. explanatory note, RIA report or other documents containing clear information on the issues and questions at stake) was made available for public consultation in addition to the draft regulation
Yes
No
No data available / not assessed
| All five of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (3 points) | |
| Four of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (2 points) | |
| Three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (1 point) | |
| Less than three of the cases reviewed meet the criterion (0 points) |