From January 1, a
law enters into force in the Russian Federation, introducing a number of requirements for the official websites of the authorities, which is intended to become a desktop for virtual fighters with the system and web developers working with the authorities. For the first time in the Russian legislation the definition of the official site of an authority is given. For the first time, standards for filling sites are set at such a high level. So what should be the site of the authority?
Immediately make a reservation that the law itself is not devoted entirely to Internet sites, but introduces a new institution for providing citizens with information about the work of state bodies. Internet issues are addressed precisely in terms of ensuring open and unhindered access to this data (see note 1).
So what is the official website of the authority?
First and foremost, the law defines this concept. The official website of a public authority is a website on the Internet that contains information about the activities of the authority, whose email address includes the domain name for which the rights belong to the authority.
')
As you can see, the definition is quite good - the concept of the official site will also include subdomains and subdirectories on web servers. True, for the sake of completeness, it was still worth telling what a “site” is. But, apparently, this is already an axiomatic concept.
Please also note that the domain name must be issued to the state authority, and not to IT-person, the head of the authority or Vasya Pupkin, the son of the farm manager.
If there is no site authority
Nothing wrong.
The law allowed local governments (municipal district level) not to start their website if it decides to post information about its activities on the website of a higher authority (at the regional level). Also, the authorities of the settlement level (villages, farms, villages, towns) can publish their information on the sites of the district level.
But to strive for this is necessary.
Because Article 10 of the law states that “state bodies, local governments use the Internet, in which they create official websites, to post information about their activities.” It is not clear from the text of the law whether the body will be punished for the lack of a site, but a hint that it is better to have a site is made quite transparently.
I also note that all authorities above the district level should have their own sites. Contradictions to this statement in the law is not found.
What should be on the site?
At first I wanted to tire the reader with a lengthy copy-paste from the law, but then I changed my mind. The whole range of information that should be located on the website is listed in article 13 of the law (to
familiarize ).
The list is sufficiently complete and now a citizen can reprimand the body for poor-quality content (see important note 2).
The authorities did not limit the collection of information, allowing to post "other information about their activities." Perhaps this means that on the websites of the authorities we will continue to meet the news from the life of the runway "Eden Russia" (sarcasm).
Paragraph 3 of Article 13 indicates that the composition of the information posted on the site is determined by the relevant lists of information. Apparently, the authorities should adopt internal documents establishing these lists in accordance with the law. In the list of information to be placed, the periods of updating and obsolescence of information (!) Are also set, i.e. You can make claims for irrelevant content.
Summarizing, we can say that the top-priority Internet tasks for government agencies are now as follows:
1. To assign the domain to the authority.
2. To adopt internal documents on the work of the site (resolution / order on the official site, the provision on the official site, a list of information posted on the site).
3. To approve the structure of the site in accordance with the law, make changes to the content of existing resources.
4. Profit.
Pluses for authority
They are. In response to a request for the work of a government agency, officials can quite officially spit at you with a link to the site or even not answer at all (!) If the requested information is posted on the Internet (Articles 19, 20).
On the one hand, it’s a shame, on the other hand, government agencies have an incentive to fill the site in order to save time on answers to applicants. In general, the state is beginning to understand the benefits of the Internet.
The main thing that
could not hide the information (as was the
lack of references to documents or
mixing Cyrillic and Latin ). However, the law notes that the site should work in accordance with the technical and linguistic requirements for information systems and at least formally have a lever for influencing unscrupulous bureaucrats.
Another plus for the authority. If the authority does not have a website, it is obliged to provide conditions within its walls or public places (libraries, etc.) for acquaintance with information about its work. If the site is available, then this is optional (article 17).
In this case, distant villages that are not burdened with attention from providers and the poor are suffering. Let us leave it on the conscience of the authors of the law and hope that the generalization of the
mediaization will suddenly
fall on us, because the law implicitly obliges this, in what lies
Minus for authority
Clause 2 of Article 10 instructs the authority to create public places (on the premises of bodies, local governments, state and municipal libraries, other accessible places) to connect to the Internet to access its site.
I think that this provision of the law will not work, because incomprehensible requirements for such an item. Should it be a full-fledged workplace? Or maybe (bes) a wired access point? Maybe an information kiosk? How many users should be servicing such an item at the same time? How to take into account the cost of such an access point, because the law does not allow to charge for access to the official site? There are many questions and the law does not give answers to them.
Request status of a citizen sent via the Internet
Previously, authorities could ignore requests sent via the Internet, because there was no legal basis for conferring on them some status, and the authorities independently determined what to do with such appeals. Now, an electronic request for information on the work of an authority is equal to a written one and should be taken into account in a general manner (Article 18, paragraph 9).
Contradictions
About neponyatkah with equipment access points to the network already mentioned above.
And now about the email. Article 10 obliges to place on the website email addresses where you can send a request, and paragraph 1 (a) of Article 13 states that the email address of the authority is indicated “if available”. How it turns out, I did not understand.
What gives developers
You can offer the authorities additional services to bring the site into line with the law, scaring its imminent entry into force. True, the work will have to be done in emergency mode, if the customers' fear is great. It’s better to work calmly with those in need, I’m far from thinking that on January 2, 2010, some kind of repression will begin for bad websites.
The company “1C-Bitrix” has already understood how to get a little more money from the budget and through its partners is promoting a “ready-made solution for the authorities” called the “Portal of the Authority” in four configurations, filled with necessary and exemplary information. From myself I will add that the market initiative is correct, but the level of performance suffers. Except for the ready structure of the site from this "portal" there is nothing to take. A "content" consists mainly of nagged in the news network. About the prices of this ready-made solution you all know without me. Partners of Bitrix will take on top "for the implementation and support." On the "ready-made" solutions on other CMS can not hear anything. The choice of power, convince her that you will make a good site.
Link
http://www.rg.ru/2009/02/13/dostup-dok.html
Notes
1. It is necessary to distinguish the citizen's appeal with a question from the request for information on the activities of the state body. Work with appeals is regulated by other laws, in particular, 59- “On Consideration of Appeals of Citizens”.
2. Please note that if a site for placing information about an order was previously determined and it could have nothing to do with the official site, then now the official site should at least indicate where exactly such information is posted on the Internet.
Alexey Poroshenko specifically for Habrahabr.