The practice of electronic petitions to regional political agenda-setting


  • O. M. Kuzhman Oles Honchar Dnepropetrovsk national university
Keywords: public electronic petitions, artificial mass sending of correspondence, appeals of citizens, civic initiatives, petitions system at the regional level

Abstract

Revealed that regional political agenda interdependence with national agenda and municipal agendas. Typically, the formation and establishment of regional political agenda is under the influence of a group of factors – political culture, political communication, public identification, party and ideological preferences etc. An effective tool for establishing regional political agenda is the practice of filing and consideration of electronic petitions. Considered three types of electronic petitions: petitions submitted electronically (via email or the Internet indicating the initials, addresses and other identifying information); Public electronic petitions (petition recognizes the public after publication on the Internet); Public electronic petitions with additional participatory elements – such example as the opportunity to support public electronic petition filed electronically signed, participate in discussion forums that allow public debate on the issues raised by public electronic petitions. It is shown that the practice of electronic petitions today has become an important element of e-democracy, and the tool reports the position of citizens in government. Reveals that in Ukraine except central government petitions system introduced in regional and local government. If you get an official response from the central government should collect at least 25,000 votes of support for three months, then this rule in place determined by the relevant authority. Thus, the most liberal feeder and consideration of electronic petitions introduced Dnipropetrovsk Regional State Administration (RSA). E-petition to get his head to the consideration of Dnipropetrovsk RSA, should receive only two votes of support during the period that the author of the appeal. Proved that electronic petitions as a special form of collective appeals, in fact, represent electronic (national, regional, local – depending on the level of government) initiatives which the conditions of collecting the required number of signatures in his support are urgently considered relevant authority. For it must necessarily be made or decision given in a public way motivated refusal. It was determined that the regional feeder electronic petitions is very effective because it allows you to identify the pressing issues of interest to residents of a region, and respond to them. Thus, through electronic petition very quickly established regional political agenda. 

Author Biography

O. M. Kuzhman, Oles Honchar Dnepropetrovsk national university
applicant

References

1. Holub, M., 2016. Naskil’ky efektyvni petytsiyi i yak tse pratsyuye na Volyni [How effective the petition and how it works in Volyn]. Konkurent. Dilove internet-vydannya Volyni (in Ukrainian). Regime to access: http://konkurent.in.ua/news/volin/3408/naskilki-efektivni-peticiyi-i-yak-ce-pracyuye-na-volini.html.
2. Dakhova, I.I., 2014. Uchast’ hromadyan v upravlinni derzhavnymy spravamy: pytannya teoriyi ta praktyky [The participation of citizens in public affairs: theory and practice]. Forum prava 3, 102-109 (in Ukrainian).
3. Zakon Ukrayiny «Pro vnesennya zmin do Zakonu Ukrayiny «Pro zvernennya hromadyan» shchodo elektronnoho zvernennya ta elektronnoyi petytsiyi» [«On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine «On citizens’ appeals» on electronic addresses and e-petitions»], 02.07.2015, № 577-VIII (in Ukrainian).
4. Zakon Ukrayiny «Pro zvernennya hromadyan» [«On citizens’ appeals»], 02.10.1996, № 393/96-ВР (in Ukrainian).
5. Zakon Ukrayiny «Pro mistseve samovryaduvannya v Ukrayini» [«On local government in Ukraine»], 21.05.1997, № 28097-ВР (in Ukrainian).
6. Zakon Ukrayiny «Pro status deputativ mistsevykh rad» [«On the status of deputies of local councils»], 11.07.2002, № 93-IV (in Ukrainian).
7. Kich, T., 2016. Kharkiv u petytsiyakh: chy dopomahaye onlayn-servis zminyuvaty misto [Kharkiv The petition, or online service helps change the city]. Slobids’kyy kray (in Ukrainian). Regime to access: http://www.slk.kh.ua/news/suspilstvo/kharkiv-u-petitsiyakh-chi-dopomagaye-onlajn-servis-zminyuvati-misto.html
8. Nesterovych, V.F., 2014. Petytsiyna forma vplyvu hromads’kosti na pryynyattya normatyvno-pravovykh aktiv u SShA [Petition form public influence on the adoption of regulations in the US]. Konstytutsiyne pravo 3, 96-102 (in Ukrainian).
9. Poryadok podannya ta roz•hlyadu elektronnykh kolektyvnykh zvernen’ do holovy Dnipropetrovs’koyi oblderzhadministratsiyi [The procedure for submission and review of electronic collective appeals to the head of Dnipropetrovsk regional state administration] (in Ukrainian). Regime to access: https://e-petition.dp.gov.ua/Rekomendac_wodo_skladannja_elektronno_petic/.
10. Rozporyadzhennya holovy Dnipropetrovs’koyi oblasnoyi derzhavnoyi administratsiyi «Pro podannya holovi oblderzhadministratsiyi elektronnykh kolektyvnykh zvernen’ hromadyan ta yikh roz•hlyad» [«On the representation of the Head of electronic collective of citizens and their consideration»], 28.10.2015, № Р-634/0/3-15 (in Ukrainian).
11. Ruzhyns’kyy, V., 2015. Elektronni petytsiyi: Chomu varto povchytysya u yevropeytsiv i amerykantsiv [Electronic petition: Why learn from the Europeans and the Americans]. ua.112 (in Ukrainian). Regime to access: http://ua.112.ua/statji/elektronni-petytsii-chomu-varto-povchytysia-u-ievropeitsiv-i-amerykantsiv-268318.html.
12. Taranukha, V.P., 2002. Petytsiya yak istorychnyy vyd zvernen’ [The petition as historical view of appeals]. Derzhava i pravo 15, 206-211. Kyiv (in Ukrainian).
13. Garber, M., 2013. The White House Petition Site Is a Joke (and Also the Future of Democracy). The Atlantic. Regime to access: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/01/the-white-house-petition-site-is-a-joke-and-also-the-future-of-democracy/267238/
14. Kiplinger, W.M., 1942. Washington Is Like That; 4th edition. New York; London
15. Lindner, R., Riehm, U., 2009. Electronic Petitions and Institutional Modernization: International Parliamentary E-Petition Systems in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Democracy 1 (1), 1-11
16. Milbrath, L.W., 1963. The Washington Lobbyist. Chicago
17. Oleszek, W.J., 2001. Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process; 5th edition. Washington, D.C.
18. Riehm, U., Buhle, K., Lindner, R., 2014. Electronic Petitioning and Modernisation of Petitioning Systems in Europe: Final Report. Berlin
Published
2016-05-27
How to Cite
Kuzhman, O. (2016). The practice of electronic petitions to regional political agenda-setting. Grani, 19(6), 33-39. https://doi.org/10.15421/171617
Section
POLITICAL SCIENCE