This week we have seen through the press the controversy generated by the process of renewing the positions of two members of the Council for Transparency, whose terms end October 28. The substantive part of this conflict is in the signal sent of the loss of independence and autonomy of this body as represented by the non-renewal of these counselors by the Executive. In the opinion of all sectors and public opinion, these members have done an outstanding job for the public interest.

Beyond the possible interpretations of what has happened, what is certain is that this situation has provoked a sharp rift between parliamentarians from all sectors and the Executive. It is troublesome that the Executive has already expressed its intention not to ratify the counselors. There should be a process that creates a dialogue to find suitable names to take on this important responsibility, and these names should be ratified by the Senate.

The Council for Transparency is one of the major advances in democratic deepening in recent years, he has earned a great reputation through their opinions and actions to implement the law on access to information. This can not be put at risk through a process of selecting new members, in the absence of adequate participatory and transparent, convert to the instance of ratification in the Senate in a demonstration exercise of forces between the various positions and sectors. We can not allow this process is involved in the same dynamics which, in turn, delayed the appointment of the Comptroller General of the Republic.

We have to watch what progress has been made, and the initial step is to create a participatory and transparent discussion, open to scrutiny and input from all civil society actors, as to show the merits, abilities and knowledge of each of the applicants to the position at the formulation stage of names by the executive and the Senate to provide not only the possibility of participating in the hearing on that subject, but to ask questions of all citizens and media players. This is not original, and that once was the procedure in good faith, was followed for the selection of the first members of the Council for Transparency, and was legitimacy guarantee its founding members.

In this spirit, the civil society organizations Pro Bono , Ciudadano Inteligente and Pro Acceso, participated a few days ago sending to the Executive a document containing proposals for participation and transparency in this process, based on international experience, aimed at generating a open debate as to show the Executive's proposal prior to the date of its submission to the Senate, and thereby achieve greater public scrutiny of this process. Only this can ensure that the Council will integrate those people who really are what the country needs.