گردآوری قوانین کشورهای مختلف در رابطه با شفافیت آراء …
موارد مستند به متن قانونی باشد.
قانون مرتبط با شفافیت آراء در کنگره‌ی آمریکا:
SEC. 121. (a) Rule X V of the Rules of the House of Representatives is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new clause: “5. In lieu of the calling of the names of Members in the manner provided for under the preceding provisions of this Rule, upon any roll call or quorum call, the names of such Members voting or present may be recorded through the use of appropriate electronic equipment. In any such case, the Clerk shall enter in the Journal and publish in the Congressional Record, in alphabetical order in each category, a list
of the names of those Members recorded as voting in the affirmative, of those Members recorded as voting in the negative, and of those Members voting present, as the case may be, as if their names had been called in the manner provided for under such preceding provisions,”.
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970
طی مکاتبه‌ای که با آقای Joshua Tauberer موسس سایت GovTrack داشتیم ایشان نکات دیگری را نیز افزودند:
There is a Constitutional basis for transparency in Congress that comes from the provision about keeping a journal, which is explained here:
CRS/LII Annotated Constitution Article I
(See Clause 3 and “Duty To Keep a Journal.” This text is from a publication called the Constitution Annotated which is written by Congress’s nonpartisan researchers.)As you may know, our Constitution is exceptionally vague on basically everything, and how Constitutional requirements become day-to-day practices is largely determined by several hundred years of civil servants making things up as they go. And because Congress doesn’t like to pass laws that constrain itself, there are essentially no statutory laws (i.e. very little beyond that Constitutional provision) that relate to transparency in Congress.
So although the “journals” of each chamber of Congress are constitutionally mandated, and Congress does print physical journals, no one reads them. The House and Senate websites where votes are published (which is what people really use) are voluntary practices and exist significantly because of internal needs (members of Congress want to see their own votes) and the needs of lobbyists, with transparency for the public interest merely a third factor. Likewise, the website Congress.gov where bills are published is entirely voluntary — I don’t think there’s any legal requirement that Congress publish every bill under consideration.
What this means is that the Constitutional/legal basis of Congressional transparency is largely ignored. It isn’t strong enough to push forward any transparency initiatives. Most practices continue because of inertia, and new transparency efforts succeed (if they succeed) largely because of public pressure.
در آیین‌نامه داخلی پارلمان جمهوری چک می‌خوانیم:
ماده 76، بند 3:
The results of a vote shall be made public in electronic format. This provision does not apply to meetings or their parts that are closed to the public.
1 پسندیده