" Accountability in Central European Post-Communist Countries: Reality or Illusion "

1. Pavol Frič "Accountability in Central European Post-Communist Countries: Reality or Illusion" International Workshop on Social Audit, Social Accounting and Accountability Charles University in Prague 15th – 16th May 2008

2. ACCOUNTABILITY PARADOX Complex system of formal accountability institutions, instruments and procedures- free elections, parliaments, reporting and controlling mechanisms, free mass media, huge amount of civil society organizations, special legislative background (acts on conflict of interests, public procurements, free access to information, ombudsman…) Scholars and general public usually do not consider political and public policy institutions as accountable(low degree of trust in institutions – government, parliament, courts, police …). Why?

3. CORRUPT STATE? Source: GfK Prague 2006

4. WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY? Relational approach: Accountability= a relationship between two parties: the accountor and the accountee (Pollitt 2003), vertical relations between: elites= accountor and the general public= accountee/accountability forum(Bovens 2005)

5. SYMETRIC RELATIONAL APPROACH Asymmetric approach: one-sided duty of one subject to answer to the other subject for its actions. Symmetric approachboth sides have their own duties in a complex of accountability relations Accountability depends on abilities and willingness both the elites and the general public to fulfil their (accountor/accountee) role. For example: If the general public does not fulfil its accountee´s role, it (in the eyes of elites)loses its moral right to hold elites accountablefor their behavior.

6. STANDARD CONSPIRACY ANSWER Formal institutions are occupied by bad (parasitic)informal networks, which behind the scenescreate parallel power structuresand decide about important matters of the public interest This is the result of the specialhistorical heritageof the communist era, when people have to faced the“regulatory conversion” - an actual takeover of the control over society by informal networks of old communist comrades.

7. SURVEY RESULTS: THE PUBLIC´S VIEW Source: GfK Prague 2004

8. SURVEY RESULTS:THE ELITE´S VIEW Majority of elites (68%) suggest that theinfluence of networksin the Czech societyis smallor very small Czech elitesdo not believein the conspiracy scenario, when informal networks from behinds the scenes of formal institutions pull the strings and thus make formal procedures not credible. Instead they see lack of professionalism and low moral standards of the staff working in these institutions. The relatively low credibility of formal institutions is caused by individual rather than system factors

9. THE FIRST CONFRONTATION Source:CESES, 2005/7

10. THE PUBLIC´S VIEW Suspicion that political and other elites are just playing theaccountability gamewith them. Frequent corruption scandals of members of elites donot havecathartic outcomes. Citizens do not understand corruption scandals as proofs of a functioning accountability system but rather astargeted provocations. Moreover, most citizens believe that the revealed scandals are only thetip of the icebergand the elites do not allow them to see the rest The Czech public feels powerless, tend to be aresigned onlooker.

11. NON-ACCOUNTABILITY IS NORMAL Citizens seem to haveadapted to the informal, clientelist, non-accountablepracticesof their elites. The majority (57%) of the Czech general public finds bribing to be anormal social practice. Most people (72%) agree that one is best off “having agood friend in the right places”, a patron who can help them solve problems effectively.

12. PUBLIC FAILURE The citizens criticise their elites but, so far, they are not taking any radical steps to change the situation. Czech citizens are not courageous followers of theirleaders from civil societyorganisations, making them look likegenerals without armies, rather than respected leaders of social movements. Citizens are not and do not want to be a valid part of the accountability system. The necessary courage to hold elites accountable is missing. Most members of the general public (63%) follow therule:“One lives best quietly, without standing out, in order to avoid unnecessary trouble”(CESES 2005).

13. CORRUPT SYMBIOSIS Both the elites and the general publicfeel relatively comfortablein this situation. Both sides have invested too much into the system of informal relations andconstructing a real accountability system seems too risky. The elites are not accountable and the general public does not abide by formal rules. Both sideslimit their demandsto the other side.

14. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

15. THE SECOND CONFRONTATION Source:CESES, 2005/7

16. Informal Networks are created by the set of various actors linked through reciprocal relationships - reciprocal transactions (exchange of goods and services) between these actors happen on the basis of mutual trust and solidarity - course of these transactions is normatively regulated, i.e., the behaviour of members (actors) in the network is subject to the internal social control are influencing their surroundings as the collective social actors - which is made possible through the spontaneous, decentralized coordination based on the shared norms and values, which are an integral part - of the generally shared, „programme orientation“ of the network, or, collective identity of the members of the network.