Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Open Data in the Judiciary Branches of Argentina Chile and Uruguay


Published on

"A research poster presented as part of the Exploring the Emerging Impacts of Open Data in Developing Countries project at the Research Sharing Event in Berlin, 15th July 2014. For more see"

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Open Data in the Judiciary Branches of Argentina Chile and Uruguay

  1. 1. Open Data in the Judiciary Branches of Argentina Chile and Uruguay Introduction This study focuses on the openness of judiciary branch data and its impact in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay. It is also oriented to address how the information is used by key stakeholders. Even though judiciaries provide information related to rulings, statistics and budget, they still do not use open formats. Openness has created more transparent judicial environments but has not led to judicial accountability yet. Research Question: What are the most important changes that have resulted from the publication of judicial data? Do judiciaries publish their information in open formats? Method The methodology was divided into 4 stages: Conclusions •  Judicial information does not yet comply with all requirements for being considered as open data. •  Proactive data publication took place because of a belief in the obligation to make the justice service more transparent, rather than for reasons of efficiency. •  Despite the efforts made, there is still a lack of balance between the supply and demand of judicial data. •  The will of judicial branches to implement open data is crucial, notwithstanding the openness at other levels of government. While Uruguay shows a more enabling country context, it ranks at the bottom in judicial open data. On the contrary, Argentina´s judicial branch has a wider information policy compared to its country context. Citation information: Elena,  S.  y  Pichón  Rivière,  A.  (mayo  de  2014).  Recomendaciones  para  implementar  una  políCca  de  datos  abiertos  en  el   Poder  Judicial.  Documento  de  PolíCcas  Públicas  /  Recomendación  N°133.  Buenos  Aires:  CIPPEC. CIPPEC ( Credits The funding for this work has been provided through the World Wide Web Foundation 'Exploring the Emerging Impacts of Open Data in Developing Countries' research project, supported by grant 107075 from Canada’s International Development Research Centre ( Find out more at This  work  is  licensed  under  a  CreaCve  Commons  ASribuCon  4.0  InternaConal  License. Evidence and findings •  Judicial officers in Uruguay and Argentina did not know about the concept of open data. In Chile some of them did. Users had more information about open data. •  All three countries got the highest scores in the non-discrimination standard. One flaw was the need of licenses for the use of software. •  The three countries have high results on accessibility. The information was available as a whole, without cost, and ready for downloading. •  Argentina ranked on top for reusability, followed by Uruguay and then Chile. The three countries use data formats that do not allow it to be easily exported. •  The three countries provide updated information, indicating a trend towards the sustainability of this policy. •  Users and officials interviewed agreed that the quantity of information should increase. They also agreed that the information is not systematically used to design public policy and to promote accountability. They said that the public at-large does not know how to use the information. DescripCve      à   Collection of transparency related data available on the judiciaries’ web pages.   DiagnosCc      à   Checklist to analyze weather research results comply with open data standards   Analytical      à   Integral analysis of findings regarding its internal and external use   Prospective      à   Recommendations for adopting open data policies