Transparency is part of democracy
Finland has a long history of monitoring and regulating political decision-making and its transparency. The statutory basis for political oversight is well established, especially as a result of the monitoring of election and political party funding. The National Audit Office of Finland (NAOF) was assigned the responsibility of maintaining the Finnish Transparency Register and supervising political advertising for much the same reasons as it was made responsible for monitoring the funding of elections and political parties more than 15 years ago: to increase the transparency of decision-making, combat inappropriate influencing, and strengthen public trust.
In the case of both political funding and political influencing, the general consensus underlying the related legislative processes is that transparency increases public trust in politics and politicians while also helping to prevent corruption. The justification for assigning these duties to the NAOF was that they are closely linked to the functioning of Finland’s constitutionally protected democratic system. From this perspective, they are also appropriately and naturally related to the NAOF’s duty to promote democracy and public trust in it. It is not difficult to agree with these justifications – our task as an independent institution is to ensure the accountability of public authorities and the transparency of how decision-making processes and political actors are influenced in Finland.
The Finnish Transparency Register complements Finland’s approach to openness
In Finland, political funding regulation revolves largely around disclosure obligations, where actors are expected to report on the funding of their political activities and the sources of this funding. However, reporting on political funding alone is not sufficient for increasing the transparency of decision-makers and the grounds for their decisions. During the previous government term, the Finnish Transparency Register was enacted through a parliamentary process for largely the same purposes as the regulation of political funding: to increase public access to information on how decision-makers are influenced, and to strengthen public trust in Finland’s decision-makers.
It is particularly noteworthy that this regulation also extends to informal contacts, which do not necessarily leave the types of documentary trails that official hearings or formal working groups do. In other words, the Transparency Register also highlights interactions that would otherwise be left undocumented.
The ability to influence the decision-making process is a key part of the democratic system. Stakeholder hearings bring different perspectives into the drafting process and allow decision-makers to consider how new regulations and initiatives are likely to be perceived. This allows for well-though-out decisions that their makers can stand behind.
An increasing number of countries have adopted or are planning to adopt transparency registers. The OECD is doing important work in bringing different actors together and encouraging discussion among them. We have actively participated in this dialogue and highlighted our experiences with the Finnish model, which is ambitious by international standards, even though it does not yet cover all forms of influencing in public decision-making.
Finnish media supports citizens’ right to information
Public access to information is also an essential part of the democratic system. In practice, transparency is often realised through the media: journalists convey and interpret information, allowing the public to evaluate how power is used by decision-makers. Finnish citizens are also well aware of their rights and how they can obtain vital information from the authorities.Indeed, Finnish legislation describes political accountability as a key consequence of political oversight.
However, the role of the media is not limited to the dissemination of existing information. Journalists are also active seekers of information, and requests for information under the Act on the Openness of Government Activities are a key part of the journalistic process. Information requests can be used to highlight such information that is not readily available or that requires separate processing and assessment by the authorities.
Requests for information thus complement the proactive attempts made by Finland’s public authorities to maintain their communications and registers. In recent years, both the number and scope of requests for information have increased. This reflects not only a growing demand for information but also the active use of such information in public debate and in the assessment of decision-making. This trend emphasises the need for examining transparency in a holistic manner: how authorities publish information on their own initiative and how public access to information can be improved so that fewer individual requests for information are needed.
Transparency cannot be achieved through regulation alone
Transparency is not just a regulatory question – it also requires the development of practical operating methods, the involved participation of public authorities, and the active use of information in society. It is essential to ensure that information is not only available but also provided in a structured, up-to-date, and usable form. This, in turn, will help strengthen the proactive realisation of transparency. For its part, the NAOF has sought to engage with the media in an open and transparent manner, and to provide them with high-quality register data.
The development of transparency is directly linked to its operating environment, which is why its implementation requires continuous assessment and the ability to examine both regulation and practices in changing circumstances. The key point is to view transparency as an integral part of the functioning of the democratic system, rather than as a separate obligation. This way, it can be used to steer activities in a consistent manner at both the institutional and individual levels. When transparency is implemented in a controlled, comprehensible, and appropriate way, it strengthens the quality of information, supports the assessment of the decision-making process, and fosters the preconditions for constructive public debate. This way, transparency can support the building of trust in a long-term and sustainable manner.