Detailed Information :

Colombia

Year of Establishment: 2003

Project Phase: Completed

Participants:

• Colombian Confederation of Chambers of Congress (Confecámaras)
• Office of the Vice-President of Colombia (Presidential Anti-Corruption Program)
• United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
• More than 77 elected mayors and governors of different geographic entitities
• Civil society groups
• Center For International Private Enterprise (CIPE)

Scope:

• Drafting, signing and follow-up on compliance with transparency pacts, i.e., the agreements involving commitments between mayors and governors on the one hand and representatives of the general public and the private and public sectors on the other – with the National Government acting as witness. Such pacts seek to strengthen efficiency and transparency at the local government level, as well as to promote civic participation in the social monitoring of public affairs.

Key Facts:
Description

• Achieve a greater involvement of civil society in fighting corruption.
• The Transparency Pacts in Colombia were set up in 2001.
• Through the pacts, local administrations commit to conducting a review of the processes that are most susceptible to corruption, such as planning and budgeting, management of public resources, or procurement.
• As of 2005, a total of 128 transparency pacts had been signed.

Objectives

• Develop local pacts enhancing the transparency of public administration and oversight from the general public.
• Monitor and evaluate the compliance with commitments undertaken in transparency pacts.

Outcome

• As of 2005, out of a total of 128 transparency pacts signed: 31 with governorates, 29 with departmental seats, 35 with other municipalities, and 33 withregional autonomous corporations.

Key Learning:

• The pacts have helped to ensure greater pluralistic participation of the general public in the preparation of local budgets and development plans.
• Transparency was enhanced by the establishment of permanent information channels between public administration systems and civil society.
• This type of project should be continuous rather than a one-time event.
• Key implementation challenges:
• Frequent changes in responsible government personnel
• Limited genuine interest from local governments
• Lack of objectivity in evaluation
• Lack of resources for in situ follow-up and evaluation
• Unstable security situation
• Insufficient civil society commitment and involvemnt

Mechanisms:

• Cost: $15,000 in external funding (CIPE) to launch the initiative; a number of local chambers of commerce (Bogotá, Cartagena, Medellín, Pereira, Bucaramanga and Cali) have continued activities covering all costs involved with their own funds.
• Steps involved:
• Invitation presented to the mayor or governor
• Establishment of a follow-up committee
• Discussion and drafting of the transparency pact
• Signing of the transparency pact
• Ongoing structured follow-up and evaluation of the pact
• Dissemination of the results of the evaluation
• Monitoring:
• Follow-up committees consisting of a maximum of nine members were selected from among civil society representatives. Each local chamber of commerce had a regional coordinator responsible for coordinating with civil society and establishing a follow-up Committee.
• Follow-up committees were responsible for evaluating compliance with the commitments assumed under the pact in each municipality, by means of periodic reports forwarded to the Presidential Anti-Corruption Program.
• The Presidential Anti-Corruption Program provided sanctions affecting local government budgets or calling for censure and public dissemination of infringements committed.

Benefits:

• For local administrations: increase in credibility and trust by the general public, technical and financial support from the Presidential Anti-Corruption Program.
• For the private sector: government commitment to be transparent in awarding contracts, prospects for fairer competition in public tenders and procurement.
• For the public: better flow of information from the government regarding various processes involved in public administration, improved social monitoring and civic participation.

Graph of stakeholder relationship:

Links:

• Confederacion Colombiana de Camaras de Comercio (In Spanish Only)
• Vicepresidente de la República de Colombia (In Spanish Only)
• United Nations Development Program

Source:

• CIPE’s Reform Toolkit, March 2008
• Interview with stakeholders.