Citizen Law Making vs. Legal Illiteracy


  • Raluca Onufreiciuc Lawyer, Joint Phd Candidate University of Bucharest and University of A Coruña
  • Oana Olariu Teaching assistant, Department of Romanian Studies, Journalism and Communication Sciences, and Comparative Literature, „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iaşi



e-democracy, public participation, civic engagement, illiteracy, citizen law making


Law-making should not exclude citizens. The following paper analyses how citizens‟ engagement in policymaking fails because of citizens‟ illiteracy in law and administration knowledge and provides an updated scenario for building common knowledge through discourse production along policy drafting. In a context of a huge appetite for active participation in the decision-making processes, it is of vital importance to collect people‟s views and gain their confidence and support. Creating a constant habit from citizen participation is not only bringing added value in law making, but it is also a guarantee that they will meet the needs of citizens and therefore generate public commitment. Although citizens can contribute with their input, they have limited understanding and control over the data they provide and the results, often remaining detached from the very mission and scope of such involvement.


Aitamurto, T. (2016). Collective intelligence in law reforms: When the logic of the crowds and the logic of policymaking collide. In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 2780-2789). Retrieved from

Aitamurto, T., & Landemore, H. E. (2015). Five design principles for crowdsourced policymaking: Assessing the case of crowdsourced off-road traffic law in Finland. Journal of Social Media for Organizations, 2(1), 1-19.

Alavi, M., & Tiwana, A. (2002). Knowledge integration in virtual teams: The potential role of KMS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(12), 1029-1037. doi:10.1002/asi.10107

Behrens, J., Kistner, A., Nitsche, A., & Swierczek, B. (2014). The principles of liquid feedback. Retrieved from

Benkler, Y. (2002). Coase‟s penguin, or, Linux and the nature of the firm. The Yale Law Journal, 112(3), 369. doi:10.2307/1562247

Cindio, F., & Stortone, S. (2013). A two-dimensional space to frame participatory initiatives and platforms. In Crowdsourcing the Mexico City Constitution. Retrieved from

Crowdsourcing the Mexico City Constitution. (2018). Retrieved from

Faria, C. F. S. de. (2013). The open Parliament in the age of the internet: Can the people now collaborate with legislatures in law-making? [E-book]. Madrid, Spain: Câmara dos Deputados, Edições Câmara. Retrieved from

Gilens, M., & Page, B. I. (2014), Testing theories of American politics: Elites, interest groups, and average citizens. Washington, DC, USA: American Political Science Association.

Goldkuhl, G., & Braf, E. (2001). Contextual knowledge analysis-understanding knowledge and its relations to action and communication. In Second European Conference on Knowledge Management Proceedings (pp. 197-208). Retrieved from a3e2051.pdf

Herrera-Viedma, E., Martinez, L., Mata, F., & Chiclana, F. (2005). A consensus support system model for group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. IEEE Transactions on fuzzy Systems, 13(5), 644-658. doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2005.856561

Nelimarkka, M., Nonnecke, B., Krishnan, S. Aitamurto, T., Catterson, D., Crittenden, C., & Goldberg, K. (2014). Comparing Three Online Civic Engagement Platforms using the „Spectrum of Public Participation‟ Framework. In Internet, Policy, and Politics Conference on Crowdsourcing for Politics and Policy (pp. 1-22).

Nwogwugwu, N., & Ajayi, F. (2015). Educated elites participation in law making and adherence to rule of law in Ogun State (2003-2011). Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(4), 55-69. doi:10.12816/0019025

Pérez, I. J., Cabrerizo, F. J., Alonso, S., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2013). A new consensus model for group decision making problems with nonhomogeneous experts. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 44(4), 494-498. doi:10.1109/tsmc.2013.2259155

Pérez, I. J., Cabrerizo, F. J., Alonso, S., Dong, Y. C., Chiclana, F., & HerreraViedma, E. (2018). On dynamic consensus processes in group decision making problems. Information Sciences, 459, 20-35. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2018.05.017

Van Dijk, T. A. (2005). Contextual knowledge management in discourse production. A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis, 71-100. doi:10.1075/dapsac.13.07dij




How to Cite

Onufreiciuc, R., & Olariu, O. (2019). Citizen Law Making vs. Legal Illiteracy. Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty: Law, 7(2), 1-9.

Publish your work at the Scientific Publishing House LUMEN

It easy with us: publish now your work, novel, research, proceeding at Lumen Scientific Publishing House

Send your manuscript right now