This article explores, in a comparative manner, the state-of-play of digital transformation of public administration in EU Member States. Using a specific methodological toolkit that combines policy and statistical analysis for each EU Member State, this article evaluates the investments in the digitalization of public services, the use of broadband, the access to digital public services, the number of e-government users, the level of digital public services for citizens and businesses and open data. In our analysis, we will argue that the gaps and discrepancies in the field of digitalization of public administration, correlated with the indicators monitored in the Digital Economy and Society Index, have conditioned the EU Member States to design specific actions, measures and investments related to the national context. Points for practitioners The gaps and discrepancies concerning the digitalization of public administration are analyzed and evaluated in relation to the state-of-play of digital transformation of public administration in EU Member States, correlated with the objectives and funding allocated to the digitalization pillar of the NRRP. The digitalization gap is measured by identifying and evaluating quantifiable indicators. Evaluations regarding the pillar of the digital transformation of public administration at national and regional levels are available, allowing comparative analyses to be carried out.
Scholars have long debated the normative rationality, the temporal and legal aspects, and finally the limits and modern practices of parliamentary immunity. Therefore, this study does not insist on these classical interpretations anymore, but seeks to contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the conceptual history of parliamentary immunity. Embracing two schools of thought, the Koselleckian interpretation and the Skinnerian variant, this paper aims to establish and clarify in detail the story of the concept of parliamentary immunity in order to elucidate, in a Socratic fashion, what we really mean when we say that a senator or a deputy benefits from legislative immunity. This inquiry will help us emphasise how this concept leaves behind its abstract notion and becomes an institution with strict rules and practices. In addition, considering the importance of this concept in the modern legislative and rhetoric histories and the frequency with which it is used, this study will question the meanings of parliamentary immunity in the light of different historical settings and will eventually trace out a single, coherent, and unified conceptual matrix. My contention is that once parliamentary immunity -seen as a conceptual construct only adjusting the balance of power between the executive and the legislative powers -becomes an institution with strong practices, it enforces the parliament as a unified and independent body and creates the prerequisite conditions for the democratic development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.