Principles of Organization of Parliamentary Control Over the Defense and Security Sector: Interparliamentary Union Experience

The experience gained in Ukraine shows that there is a clear need for parliamentarians to work closely with the government and the security and defence sector. However, although they work towards the same goal, their roles are fundamentally different and should be different. That is why there are at least four reasons why parliamentary oversight of security and defence matters is crucial. First, it is a cornerstone of democracy to prevent autocratic rule. Secondly, to this day, one of the most important parliamentary mechanisms for control (oversight) of the executive branch is the budget. Thirdly, deputies play an important role in considering draft laws on security and defense issues. Fourth, parliamentarians maintain regular contact with the population and are well placed to seek their views. They can also raise citizens’ concerns in parliament and ensure that they are reflected in security and defense laws and policies. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account certain problems of parliamentary control over the security and defense sector, of which three aspects of the security and defense sector pose a real problem for the exercise of parliamentary control (oversight), namely: – legislation on state secrets may limit or jeopardize parliamentary oversight of the security and defense sector; – not all parliamentarians have sufficient knowledge and experience to effectively address security and defense issues; – international cooperation in the field of security and defense may affect the transparency and democratic legitimacy of a country’s security and defense policy if it results in parliament being left out of the process. It is noted that while parliament and government have different roles in security and defence matters, they share responsibility for supporting the proper functioning of the security and defence sector. These two parties should not be seen as adversaries with opposing goals. On the contrary, they need each other to achieve an effective, comprehensive and people-centred security and defence policy. It is determined that the legislative branch exercises parliamentary oversight by enacting laws that define and regulate the functioning of the security and defence sector and their powers, as well as by adopting appropriate budget appropriations. Such oversight may also include the establishment of a parliamentary ombudsman or commission that can initiate investigations into citizen complaints. It is noted that there are no internationally agreed standards in the area of ​​democratic and parliamentary oversight, as security and defence have been considered a matter of national sovereignty. However, there are some regional standards, such as the OSCE Code of Conduct. There are also certain principles governing democratic civil-military relations. It is noted that since many state bodies and departments, as well as relevant program documents, are involved in the implementation of national security and defence policy, it is important for the state to develop a comprehensive national security and defence strategy that would involve all relevant players and relevant aspects of security and defence. Such an approach, taking into account the processes that occur in the field of information accumulation and processing, regardless of its volume, allows the government to consider all aspects of security and defence holistically and comprehensively. It is emphasized that parliament can and should play an important role at the decision-making stage, especially since once a document on national security and defence policy reaches parliament, it becomes the “property of parliament” and becomes a direct responsibility. Thus, it is the parliament that should be given sufficient time to study it in depth and refrain from hasty consideration. It is stated that democratic oversight, as a principle of good governance, can only be effective when the public is informed about the main issues that are open to discussion at the parliamentary level. It has been stated that democratic oversight, as a principle of good governance, can be effective only when the public is informed about the main issues that are open, taking into account the above, for discussion at the parliamentary level.