This paper learns from G-Watch accountability frontliners that conducted the observation of the SAP validation by looking into and analyzing their reports and notes, and by undertaking informal online reflection-assessment sessions with them. The quick undertaking of G-Watch accountability frontliners to observe DSWD’s SAP in the midst of a pandemic shows that (a) citizens can continue to check government processes even in a crisis situation as “accountability frontliners,” though safety measures need to be set up and prior engagement with concerned government offices is deemed most facilitative, (b) citizen oversight of a supposed accountability mechanism in a government program is critical especially during a pandemic not only to check whether the mechanism is operating efficiently and effectively, but also to reveal possible distortion on the ground of the accountability intent of the mechanism, and (c) transparency, participation and accountability mechanisms in government could totally serve purposes that do not advance citizen empowerment, but instead check or control citizens, reversing accountability relationship between government and citizens critical in democracy.
How can ordinary citizens pressure local officialstorespond to their demands? The people from the province of North Cotabato in Mindanao seemsto have found a solution and areisattempting to further enhance it.
This case is about how an organization attempts a strategic shift: from pressure/ protest-only approach to employing an integrated approach: pressure politics and constructive engagement. This case investigates what the enabling factors were of such a strategic shift and the challenges involved in going through with it. Since the strategic shift also involved the use of digital technology as facilitated by a global program (Making All Voices Count), the case also reflects on when and how digital technology worked (in this case, did not work) to support the work of an organization.
"In anticipation of the 2016 election, the third Philippine action plan sought to institutionalize existing OGP participatory mechanisms and largely continued expanding the scope of activities from previous action plans. While general awareness of OGP remains low, the passage on an Executive Order on Freedom of Information and inclusion of new commitments on improving public service delivery indicates sustained energy on areas with immediate impact on citizens’ lives."
The Philippines has a long history of state–society engagement to introduce reforms in government and politics. Forces from civil society and social movements have interfaced with reform-oriented leaders in government on a range of social accountability initiatives – to make governance more responsive, to introduce policy reforms, and to make government more accountable.
This piece puts forward propositions on "doing accountability differently" through strategies that tackle power and systemic issues in order to address root causes (instead of just the symptoms) of corruption and bad governance through balanced and synergistic, multi-level and multi-actor actions on transparency, participation and accountability.
This provides background paper for a learning event on transforming governance, which presents vertical integration as “an effective way of doing accountability work because it can reveal more clearly where the main problems are, permitting more precisely targeted civil society advocacy strategies.”
In June 2015, a North-South convergence of four organizations hosted a workshop entitled “scaling accountability.” In contrast to the conventional idea of “scaling” as involving the replication of local pilots, our use of the term was intended to convey the idea of going beyond bounded projects to address systemic accountability problems.
This study explores whether and how Philippine open government reformers have been able to leverage the Open Government Partnership (OGP) mechanisms, processes, spaces, and assistance to improve government responsiveness and accountability.
'While the President himself emphasizes the importance of building people's trust in government, he doesn't seem to fully appreciate the role played by free access to information in building public trust'
The DAP is a sensible fiscal discipline mechanism provided that possible abuses of discretion in its use will be avoided. In identifying which projects and programs to cancel, the executive must have a clear performance standards to use which can be checked. In re-allocating savings (as defined by law), the projects and programs to be funded must be items in the GAA or items that will pass through legislative enactment.
Checks-and-balance relationship between the executive and the legislature collapses because the legislators partake a responsibility of the executive. As such, they become subsumed under the President being the head of the executive branch in the execution of the budget--a violation of the separation of powers.
That checks-and-balance relationship exist for a reason: it is precisely to prevent actions of the executive that could already be beyond and abusive of its powers. Because this could happen intentionally or unintentionally.
It is possible that because of the intention to serve (to provide resources for priority programs and meet the needs of the people), the executive overlooked (intentionally or unintentionally) a legal provision.
Those in government might want to challenge themselves more as to how the use of information technolgy (IT) as a means for transparency can serve as a DETERRENT to abuse and malpractice, especially by the most powerful officials, which is a faster way to advance accountability.
This Complaint should be our opportunity to show we can hold power to account. It should also be an opportunity for us to bring the integrity of our political system. This Complaint should strengthen our call to ABOLISH PORK!
Here are five areas to watch in the new set-up to make the reformed pork less fatty
'I enjoin others to try to fill-up the blank below and send the letter to good and honest Congresspersons you know too'
This is a simple and easy-to-use guide on how to implement a community-based monitoring of local service delivery using the tools and methods developed in the pilot implementation of the G-Watch Localization Project.
This guidebook gives the citizens’ monitoring team, which we will call the Integrity Watch, a framework on how to assess the processes undertaken by the LGU and the WSP in water service provision. This guidebook is based on actual experiences of other citizens monitoring groups. It has been crafted using Human Rights-Based Approach to organization and development within the water sector, consistent with the MDGF 1919’s mainstreaming of HRBA.