How effective are accountability mechanisms? Do these mechanisms create a false sense security, in terms of what can be reasonably achieved? There is no question that internal and external mechanisms of accountability are designed to influence the behaviour of government and administration. However, these mechanisms are only effective and legitimate if they are sufficiently financed, clearly defined, open and transparent.
This World Bank article looks at various institutions and mechanisms commonly used in modern constitutional systems to make governments and administrations more accountable. The article concludes that there is no one mechanism that will serve all purposes, and that each adds in its own distinct way to achieving satisfactory levels of accountability.
Recent trends in Western countries show a tendency towards internal accountability mechanisms, a trend which may have a negative impact on governance. When compared to external mechanisms, we know little about how they work in practice, and are characteristically less transparent and less organised. In addition, issues relating to conflict of interests may compromise internal mechanisms.
Although Western democracies have made substantive progress implementing effective accountability mechanisms, the same cannot be said for new democracies in Eastern Europe. Many related initiatives in the region have been affected by the lack of expertise and the lack of resources. Due to substantive pressure from many sources, many Eastern European states have resorted to adopting accountability mechanisms without properly assessing their viability and sustainability. As a result, what emerged were dysfunctional institutions and low levels of accountability.
Other important findings include:
- Effective accountability mechanisms protect the rights of citizens and increase the legitimacy of governments and administrations;
- Common models of accountability: judicial supervision, internal mechanisms, external appeals, ombudsman, other standard-setting bodies or parliamentary processes;
- The parliamentary process is the ultimate form of accountability;
- Australia has the most highly developed system of external appeals;
- The idea of the ombudsman as a mechanism of accountability is rapidly gaining ground in Europe and elsewhere.
Judicial supervision of the administration is an essential feature of a system of government and administration based on the rule of law. In countries where the judicial system is weak, implementing other accountability mechanisms in place of a stronger legal system, may not contribute to good governance. Thus, the key policy priorities in this regard are:
- Implementing an effective judicial system, with an efficient ombudsman mechanism;
- Developing a step by step approach with a clear order of priority;
- Committing substantial resources to develop effective accountability mechanisms;
- Implementing complimentary accountability mechanisms to reduce duplication and overlap;
- The overall aim is to develop over time a pattern of mechanisms that are adequate in their cover of government and administration.
