A truly open government is one that welcomes public involvement
Beijing’s latest circular on transparency will have bite only if channels are in place to give voice to people’s views and seek their support
Hu Shuli 11 August 2011
In the wake of growing public misgivings about the government’s handling of emergencies, Communist Party leaders last week issued “an opinion” urging its agencies and government departments to be more open and responsive to the people. The circular, jointly issued by the party’s Central Committee and the State Council, demonstrates official determination to build a clean, responsible and service-oriented government that respects the rule of law. But the goal of transparency cannot be realised without public involvement and media oversight.
A string of disasters and scandals have hit the headlines recently: the uproar sparked by Guo Meimei’s microblog posts, the Wenzhou train crash and the cover-up of a broken artefact at the Palace Museum in Beijing. In each, officials were criticised for not being upfront about details of the case and the investigation that followed.
This is clearly the issue of concern: though the circular covered a range of topics, the media largely focused on its order for greater disclosure of information in the official handling of emergencies. That the people saw the circular as a response to public grouses about official cover-ups signals their desire for honest, open government.
The government has called for greater transparency in its administration at least since 2002, when drafting began on a regulation on government information disclosure. The milestone regulation was implemented in 2008, but, as even the recent circular conceded, its enforcement has been far from satisfactory: form is too often emphasised over substance; information that should be made public is often not; the disclosure process is haphazard; and officials are unable to strike a balance between disclosure and confidentiality. Under the regulations, non-disclosure should be the exception, not the rule; in practice, the opposite is true. These problems have to be corrected.
In a modern society that values the people’s right to self-rule, the government should exercise its powers with openness. Yet, in China today, government departments are being likened to a mafia boss or a tiger. They are seen as arrogant, mean and secretive. Such a low opinion of the authorities fans public resentment that, in times of crises, can build up to a wave of discontent that hurts government credibility and threatens social stability.
Chinese society faces many contradictions, and it is inevitable that some problems in governance will arise. However, repeated government bungling only shows that the administration is unable to keep pace with the growth in China’s economy and society. There are two main reasons for this. One, civil rights awareness has grown since China opened its doors 30 years ago, and a “subject-ruler” mindset among its people is being replaced by civic consciousness. Two, the internet has triggered an information revolution, ensuring news is spread widely at high speed and low cost, and this has shaped the course of public events.
Administrative reforms are necessary to help public servants adapt to a changing environment. A more open government is a basic requirement for a government that truly serves its people. In return, the people’s views should be given voice so that they become a driving force for good governance.
On this, the circular is clear. It speaks of the importance of the people’s support and participation, and interaction between government and people, when discussing ways to relay government information. In a section on decision-making, the circular urged extensive public consultation before officials decide on key reforms and major policies and projects.
The circular also calls for standard procedures for public participation, expert evaluation, risk assessment and legal reviews. Through such a process, the people’s views can be regularly sought on political issues and social needs. It would improve the institutional capacity of government, and form the foundation of a democratic system with Chinese characteristics.
The media is an important tool in relaying public information, and it plays a key role in promoting open government. In its coverage of major events, the media has proved itself indispensable in tracking the news and mobilising the people for action. Its role is affirmed by both the circular and the 2008 regulation.
But, in reality, official attitudes towards the media remain suspicious. Incredibly, some officials even see no need to address concerns and queries raised by the media; their attitude is, “it’s up to you to believe it or not”. This bureaucratic apathy, coupled with the skewed power structure on the mainland, has resulted in state media being used not to “guide public opinion”, as it is meant to do, but to suppress it.
Governments at all levels should respect the media’s right to report independently; they should assist, not prevent, reporters doing their job, especially in times of crisis.
If administrative reforms progress too slowly, the goal of government transparency will not be easily reached. This is why the circular emphasises the importance of both an open government and its role as a service provider. To enable both, there must be effective public participation and media oversight. Thus, our immediate tasks are to set up channels for public participation in government and to allow the media to report more freely.
2 comments:
A truly open government is one that welcomes public involvement
Beijing’s latest circular on transparency will have bite only if channels are in place to give voice to people’s views and seek their support
Hu Shuli
11 August 2011
In the wake of growing public misgivings about the government’s handling of emergencies, Communist Party leaders last week issued “an opinion” urging its agencies and government departments to be more open and responsive to the people. The circular, jointly issued by the party’s Central Committee and the State Council, demonstrates official determination to build a clean, responsible and service-oriented government that respects the rule of law. But the goal of transparency cannot be realised without public involvement and media oversight.
A string of disasters and scandals have hit the headlines recently: the uproar sparked by Guo Meimei’s microblog posts, the Wenzhou train crash and the cover-up of a broken artefact at the Palace Museum in Beijing. In each, officials were criticised for not being upfront about details of the case and the investigation that followed.
This is clearly the issue of concern: though the circular covered a range of topics, the media largely focused on its order for greater disclosure of information in the official handling of emergencies. That the people saw the circular as a response to public grouses about official cover-ups signals their desire for honest, open government.
The government has called for greater transparency in its administration at least since 2002, when drafting began on a regulation on government information disclosure. The milestone regulation was implemented in 2008, but, as even the recent circular conceded, its enforcement has been far from satisfactory: form is too often emphasised over substance; information that should be made public is often not; the disclosure process is haphazard; and officials are unable to strike a balance between disclosure and confidentiality. Under the regulations, non-disclosure should be the exception, not the rule; in practice, the opposite is true. These problems have to be corrected.
In a modern society that values the people’s right to self-rule, the government should exercise its powers with openness. Yet, in China today, government departments are being likened to a mafia boss or a tiger. They are seen as arrogant, mean and secretive. Such a low opinion of the authorities fans public resentment that, in times of crises, can build up to a wave of discontent that hurts government credibility and threatens social stability.
Chinese society faces many contradictions, and it is inevitable that some problems in governance will arise. However, repeated government bungling only shows that the administration is unable to keep pace with the growth in China’s economy and society. There are two main reasons for this. One, civil rights awareness has grown since China opened its doors 30 years ago, and a “subject-ruler” mindset among its people is being replaced by civic consciousness. Two, the internet has triggered an information revolution, ensuring news is spread widely at high speed and low cost, and this has shaped the course of public events.
Administrative reforms are necessary to help public servants adapt to a changing environment. A more open government is a basic requirement for a government that truly serves its people. In return, the people’s views should be given voice so that they become a driving force for good governance.
On this, the circular is clear. It speaks of the importance of the people’s support and participation, and interaction between government and people, when discussing ways to relay government information. In a section on decision-making, the circular urged extensive public consultation before officials decide on key reforms and major policies and projects.
The circular also calls for standard procedures for public participation, expert evaluation, risk assessment and legal reviews. Through such a process, the people’s views can be regularly sought on political issues and social needs. It would improve the institutional capacity of government, and form the foundation of a democratic system with Chinese characteristics.
The media is an important tool in relaying public information, and it plays a key role in promoting open government. In its coverage of major events, the media has proved itself indispensable in tracking the news and mobilising the people for action. Its role is affirmed by both the circular and the 2008 regulation.
But, in reality, official attitudes towards the media remain suspicious. Incredibly, some officials even see no need to address concerns and queries raised by the media; their attitude is, “it’s up to you to believe it or not”. This bureaucratic apathy, coupled with the skewed power structure on the mainland, has resulted in state media being used not to “guide public opinion”, as it is meant to do, but to suppress it.
Governments at all levels should respect the media’s right to report independently; they should assist, not prevent, reporters doing their job, especially in times of crisis.
If administrative reforms progress too slowly, the goal of government transparency will not be easily reached. This is why the circular emphasises the importance of both an open government and its role as a service provider. To enable both, there must be effective public participation and media oversight. Thus, our immediate tasks are to set up channels for public participation in government and to allow the media to report more freely.
Post a Comment