Is Transparent Policy-making Irreconcilable with Direct Democracy and Consensus Government?

The notion of transparency in the public sector generally refers to the openness of governments and public administrations about their activities. One of its most important objectives is to improve relations between citizens and governments. The present contribution aims to analyse challenges to transparent policy-making in consensual federalist regimes while taking into account the role of citizen participation. The effects will be demonstrated on the case study of Switzerland since the Swiss political system combines consensual decision-making with the crucial role of direct democracy for the character of policy-making. The question of transparency will be approached specifically in regard to its role in the introduction of online citizen participation (e-Participation). Transparent policy making and e-Participation are closely connected and go hand in hand, in that transparency is one of the most important factors influencing the practical utility of e-Participation channels. Arguments advocating e-Participation are identical with those promoting more transparent policy making. The first aim is to increase the accountability of public servants to citizens in order to enhance trust in government. The second aim is to provide information to citizens, which is necessary for them to make informed decisions and therefore to participate meaningfully in public policy making (Pasquier and Villeneuve, 2007). Based on a literature review and on the results of semi-structured interviews with the cantonal managers of e-Voting projects, we argue that problems related to transparency of public authorities hinder e-Participation introduction in Switzerland. Limits that transparent policy-making encounters are reflected in the obscurity of the consultation phase of legislative process, in the late entry into force of the Swiss Freedom of Information Act and in its lack of retroactivity, but also in the disinterest of citizens to practice their right of access to information. The persisting inclination to secrecy and the unwillingness to embrace the culture of transparency that are still present in the Swiss public administration (Cottier, 2013) contradict the need to provide citizens with well-structured, quality information on government’s activities. We argue that the shortcomings of transparency are in the Swiss public sector consequences of the institutional system and principally of direct democracy. In fact, it seems that there is a trade-off between direct democracy and transparency. The more powerful instruments for challenging government’s decisions citizens have at their disposal, the less transparent the system will incline to be. Typically in the Swiss political system, there is a search for wide consensus on upcoming policy before the parliamentary phase begins. This approach is rationalized by the desire to avoid the direct-democracy phase, during which laws approved by the parliament risk being challenged in a referendum. With the increasing polarization of attitudes between public authorities and interest groups, consultations tend to be more and more informal and therefore even less likely to become public (Kriesi and Trechsel, 2008). In this connection, the question that must be answered is whether the Swiss tradition of direct democracy influences the perception of transparency in Switzerland. Are the shortcomings of transparency actually the consequences of direct democracy?