What is being done to support legislatures and by whom? What can be learned from experience so far? This study discusses different models of legislatures and political and electoral systems, with particular emphasis on fragile states. It also presents an overview of specialist agencies in this field, and of trends of donor support. While there are relatively few systematic evaluations of the results of support to legislatures, lessons from the available literature include: understand political economy; adopt a long-term, comprehensive approach; and mobilise sufficient expertise. Contextualisation is essential, and this requires politically aware analysts who can monitor developments, produce in-depth political economy analyses and adjust interventions accordingly.
Parliaments are generally weak in most developing countries, often reflecting their place in political systems with a strong presidency. Donor support to parliaments gained momentum in the early 1990s, but the knowledge base on such support remains relatively limited.
A plethora of organisations and agencies are engaged in parliamentary strengthening activities. They include bilateral donors, multilateral agencies, political party foundations, international networks and interest organisations of parliamentarians. Donor practices in support of parliaments have taken two basic forms: direct and indirect support. Direct support has the explicit objective of strengthening parliaments for democratisation and good governance purposes. Indirect support is given to parliaments as an element of promoting specific policy goals, such as poverty reduction or environmental protection.
Direct parliamentary support projects typically benefit individual country parliaments (and occasionally federal or sub-national parliaments), or international organisations of parliaments or parliamentarians. They involve building infrastructure and physical facilities, human support services, and also institutional reform and development. The preferred donor means of support has been training and the transfer of knowledge, skills and experiences through seminars, conferences and exchange programmes.
There is no generic, one-size-fits-all approach to parliamentary strengthening. Contextualisation is the watchword. Parliamentary strengthening requires a long time horizon and a demand-driven, comprehensive approach. It must be recognised that the functionality of a parliament is relational and depends on factors such as political parties, the electoral system, and the nature of the political system. Support should be based on thorough needs assessments produced in conjunction with the parliament concerned. In addition:
- Parliamentary strengthening is inherently political in nature and very sensitive. Three insights emerge relating to this:
- Multilateral agencies are often seen as less liable to pursue agendas at variance with the wishes of the recipient countries.
- Extreme donor harmonisation may be perceived as ‘ganging up’ against the recipient or monopolising the expertise and the models advanced.
- Peer advice is generally more acceptable to aid recipients than donor guidance. The involvement of fellow parliamentarians from other countries through parliamentary associations could be helpful.
- Issue-based approaches may provide useful entry points. Parliamentarians often need information and knowledge about specific policy areas.
- It is important to establish workable systems of institutional memory, learning, knowledge management, and retrieval. Institutional memory and learning is far below par in donor agencies.
