The Legal Framework for Parliamentary Modernisation: Bridging Tradition and Technological Innovation
Written on June, 2023
Introduction
Parliamentary processes, often steeped in tradition and historical precedent, are facing the pressing need for modernisation. While the push for digital transformation in legislative settings is apparent, the legal frameworks supporting such changes are often nebulous or entirely absent. This essay seeks to scrutinise the various challenges and opportunities presented by the absence or presence of legal frameworks in the adoption of technological innovations in parliamentary procedures.
The Dichotomy of Tradition and Modernisation
The core tenet of any parliamentary system lies in its rules of procedure, which are often conceived within the limitations of the period they were created. The absence of amendments to these procedural rules to accommodate technological advancements presents a significant hurdle. Even when the will for modernisation exists, the absence of formal amendments to rules of procedure can stymie progress. The lack of legal frameworks reflects not just a technology gap, but more profoundly, a knowledge and adaptability gap.
Adaptability and Literacy
One of the main challenges in this context is adaptability, or the willingness to incorporate new technologies into existing systems. This challenge is exacerbated by literacy rates, both in technological and procedural domains. When the majority of members are unfamiliar with or even intimidated by digital tools, the inertia against modernisation grows stronger. Moreover, the absence of pre-qualifications related to technological literacy for members can compound this issue. The irony here is that while technology is often viewed as a means to expedite processes and make institutions more efficient, the lack of a legal framework can make technology adoption a cumbersome process in itself.
Financial and Infrastructure Constraints
While financial constraints and the availability of infrastructure might seem like primary concerns, they are, in fact, secondary issues. Even in contexts where the infrastructure is robust, and financial resources are available, the absence of a legal framework can make the use of these resources inefficient. Therefore, the issue is less about the availability of resources and more about the inability to utilise them effectively due to the absence of legal frameworks.
Case of Technological Innovations
Incorporating technological solutions like e-platforms for submissions, digital databases, and live broadcasting systems represent a facet of modernisation. However, without a legal framework, these remain isolated initiatives, lacking the structural support to bring about a cohesive transformation.
Conclusion
The absence of a legal framework for modernisation creates a paradoxical situation where the push for digital transformation is strong, but the pull of tradition is stronger. While challenges like adaptability and literacy are significant, they are not insurmountable. A legal framework could serve as the backbone for change, providing the structural support required to move from isolated initiatives to a cohesive, modern parliamentary system. It is high time that the legal frameworks are considered not as static, archaic documents, but as dynamic entities capable of evolving with the needs of the times.