Colombia

A Safer Country for All

City/State/Region: BogotáCaliBucaramangaIbaguéPereiraValledupar
Begin – End: 1998 – 1999
Name of organization in charge: USAIDMinisterio de JusticiaUniversidad de los Andes
Type of organization in charge: government international organization private stakeholders
Level: local

Impact

?

Implementation: was the innovation effectively, partially or not put into practice at all?

Fulfillment of Aims: were the goals of the innovation completely, partially or not achieved at all?

Output: has the innovation generated recommendations, initiatives, decisions or policies?

Outcome: if there were a policy output, was it enacted or implemented?

Implementation: yes
Fulfillment of Democratic Innovation’s aim: yes
Output: -
Policy Outcome: -

A Safer Country for All was an innovation developed between 1998 and 1999 based on the so-called deliberative methodology, proposed by the Department of Political Science at the University of the Andes, with the aim of expanding the application of this methodology, in this case in the field of citizen security and specifically around the Program "Houses of Justice". This program was initiated in the middle of the administration of former President Ernesto Samper (1994-1998) in order to provide alternatives that would facilitate access to justice services for low-income, high population density communities with high rates of conflict, especially in the family. The project was developed with the support of USAID and the Inter-American Network for Democracy, and it was defined that the main line of work would be complemented with a research component, which would allow to know better the surroundings and to collect the perceptions of the population settled in the nearby or neighboring areas around the Houses of Justice. The methodology was developed with deliberative forums in the form of discussions based on guidelines developed by the university department for the consideration of options for solving the problems of justice and citizen security at the local level. A forum was held in seven cities of the country, including Bucaramanga, Pereira, Ibagué, Valledupar, Cali and Bogota. Although exact guidelines were not selected for the selection of participants, there were some indications to seek the highest possible degree of representativeness among local authorities, members of community organizations and the local community in general.

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: not backed by constitution nor legislation, nor by any governmental policy or program
Frequency: single
Mode of selection of participants: restricted
Type of participants: citizens civil society
Decisiveness: democratic innovation yields no decision
Co-Governance: yes

Means

Deliberation
Direct Voting
E-Participation
Citizen Representation

Ends

Accountability
Responsiveness
Rule of Law
Political Inclusion
Social Equality

Policy cycle

Agenda setting

Formulation and decision-making

Implementation

Policy Evaluation