header-logo header-logo

26 February 2009 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7358 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

Crystal Clear?

Should public bodies make known the reasons behind their decisions? Asks Neil Parpworth

Decisions made by public bodies very often have important and sometimes far-reaching consequences for those who are directly affected by them. In order for there to be public confidence in the decision making process, and for a decision maker to be held publicly accountable for the decisions it reaches, it is desirable that the process should be as transparent as the subject matter of the decision permits.

 

Transparency

A key feature of a transparent process is that decisions are accompanied by reasons. Where this is the case, the person affected by the decision is in a better position to appreciate on what basis the decision has been made. If, for example, the decision in question relates to a refusal to grant an applicant a licence to carry out some particular activity, explaining why the applicant was unsuccessful on this occasion may help the applicant to address the relevant issue or issues so that a future application for the same licence will stand a better chance of success.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll