 The application of the principle of transparency in the decision-making process of public institutions. Case study: Romanian Ombudsman, Public Prosecutor's Office and the Committee on Petitions of the Parliament of RomaniaCrina Radulescu No 295, Apas Papers from Academic Public Administration Studies Archive - APAS Abstract: Constitutional and legal framework: - Article 3, Romanian Constitution states the Right to information: "(1) A person's right of access to any information of public interest shall not be restricted. (2) The public authorities, according to their competence, shall be bound to provide correct information to the citizens in public affairs and matters of personal interest". - Article 1, Law No. 544 of 12 October 2001 regarding the free access to information of public interest, published in the Official Gazette of Romania No. 663 of 23 October 2001 -" The free and unrestricted access of any person at any piece of information of public interest, defined as such by this law, constitutes one of the fundamental principles of the relations between persons and public authorities, in accordance with the Constitution of Romania and with the international documents ratified by the Parliament of Romania." - Article 1, Law No. 52 of 21 January 2003 regarding the free access to information of public interest, published in the Official Gazette of Romania No. 70 of 3 February 2003 - „This Law establishes the minimal procedural rules applicable to ensure decisional transparency within central and local public administration authorities, elected or appointed, as well as of other public institutions that use public financial resources, in the relations established between them with the citizens and their legally established associations". Research focus: The article focuses on the presence of the transparency principle in the decision making process by analyzing the activity of several institutions, namely, the Romanian Ombudsman, the Public Prosecutor's Office and the Committee on Petitions of the Parliament of Romania and their relations with the citizens. All these three institutions mentioned above play an important role in the reform of the Romanian public administration. The first part of the article offers an analysis of the existing legislation and literature on the principle of transparency and the role the three institutions mentioned above play in sustaining this principle. The second part of the article consists of an exploratory empirical research of the Romanian Ombudsman, Public Prosecutor's Office and the Committee on Petitions of the Parliament of Romania and their relations with the citizens. It offers also an input on the interaction between the Romanian Ombudsman and the other two institutions. Our analysis deals with the 2004-2008 legislature and 2008-2010 (2008-2012 legislature). Research methodology: The methodology of the research is qualitative - analysis of the Ombudsman's annual reports, of the Public Prosecutor's Office activity and the reports of the Committee on Petitions of the Parliament of Romania. Keywords: transparency; right to information; ombudsman (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nsu:apasro:295 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in Apas Papers from Academic Public Administration Studies Archive - APAS Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to econpapers@oru.se.
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.