Plebiscite / Referendum for Autonomy of Resources for the Judiciary
The referendum on the Autonomy of Resources for the Judiciary was carried out to deal with a proposal for constitutional reform, through which the Judiciary would gain autonomy over its budget, limiting the role of the Legislature, which could only pronounce itself on global amounts. This proposal was carried out mainly by the Association of Judicial Officials of Uruguay and the Uruguayan Bar Association (CAU). However, in the referendum only 43.2% of the votes cast backed the proposal, which means that the reform was rejected.
Institutional design
Formalization: is the innovation embedded in the constitution or legislation, in an administrative act, or not formalized at all?
Frequency: how often does the innovation take place: only once, sporadically, or is it permanent or regular?
Mode of Selection of Participants: is the innovation open to all participants, access is restricted to some kind of condition, or both methods apply?
Type of participants: those who participate are individual citizens, civil society organizations, private stakeholders or a combination of those?
Decisiveness: does the innovation takes binding, non-binding or no decision at all?
Co-governance: is there involvement of the government in the process or not?
- Formalization
- embedded in the constitution/legislation
- Frequency
- single
- Mode of selection of participants
- open
- Type of participants
- citizens
- Decisiveness
- democratic innovation yields a binding decision
- Co-Governance
- yes
Means
|
Ends
|
