Trust

Evidence for missing indicators

Each record describes a case the indicators above cannot see. It does not affect the score or confidence because one case is not comparable across countries. A gap can become an indicator when a comparable series covers at least two countries.

• 🇧🇷Brazillinked to Trust in public institutionsstarted 2001still operating

  Cadastro Único, the unified social registry

  Since 2001, Cadastro Único has identified and characterized low-income families across Brazil and has become the entry point for more than 40 federal, state and municipal social programmes.

  40 programmes, social programmes using the registry, 2026. Ministry of Development and Social Assistance, Cadastro Único, retrieved 2026-08-29.

  How it worked: One shared identity and needs record lets multiple programmes see the same household, reducing the need for each programme to build its own eligibility system and making the state more legible to people it serves.

  Limits: A registry and its programme count show administrative reach, not whether citizens trust the state or whether benefits arrive accurately and on time. The source is the ministry responsible for the registry, and coverage depends on families keeping their records current.

• 🇧🇷Brazillinked to Trust in public institutionsstarted 2004still operating

  Portal da Transparência, the federal open-books system

  Launched in 2004, Portal da Transparência has spent 20 years publishing federal revenue, expenditure, personnel and transfer information so citizens can inspect how public money is used.

  20 years, years since launch, 2024. Controladoria-Geral da União, Portal da Transparência, retrieved 2026-08-29.

  How it worked: The government turns its own administrative records into a public interface, so oversight can begin with the same transaction detail that the bureaucracy uses to execute and audit spending.

  Limits: Publication creates the possibility of scrutiny, not evidence that people use the data or trust the institutions being scrutinized. The portal mainly covers federal government execution and excludes some state-owned and non-federal activity.

• 🇰🇷South Korealinked to Trust in public institutionsstarted 2023still operating

  MyData, citizen-directed data portability

  South Korea's MyData policy gives people a route to request and direct the transfer of personal data between services, with the Personal Information Protection Commission describing the scheme as a way to give people control over data portability after the March 2023 legal amendment.

  2023 year, year of the legal amendment establishing the data portability right, 2023. Personal Information Protection Commission, MyData policy notice, retrieved 2026-08-30.

  How it worked: The state gives people a legal route to move their own data between providers, shifting data access from a private platform choice toward a user-directed right.

  Limits: A portability right shows a legal design for user control, not whether people understand it, use it safely or receive better services. The policy notice describes the legal framework and is not an independent assessment of outcomes.

• 🇸🇬Singaporelinked to Court case clearance ratestarted 2006still operating

  Singapore Courts' case-clearance discipline

  Singapore's State Courts disposed of 21,816 civil cases against 20,358 filings in 2023, a 107% civil clearance rate; its Community Justice and Tribunals courts recorded a 99% clearance rate in the same year.

  107 % of incoming civil cases, state courts civil-case clearance rate, 2023. 99 % of incoming cases, community justice and tribunals clearance rate, 2023. Singapore Judiciary, Caseload statistics 2023, retrieved 2026-08-31.

  How it worked: Singapore Courts publish workload by court and case type, set clearance as a management measure and combine procedural reform with specialised tribunals and dispute-resolution pathways. The public series makes backlogs visible while the court system can shift suitable disputes into faster channels without pretending that every case is the same.

  Limits: Clearance is disposals divided by filings in the same year, so it can exceed 100% when courts work through earlier stock; it does not show timeliness, fairness, legal-aid access, enforcement or the quality of decisions. The Singapore figures cover court workloads and are not a comparable cross-country civil-justice index without harmonised case definitions.

• 🇵🇹Portugallinked to Court case clearance ratestarted 2013still operating

  Civil-court clearance and the CEPEJ monitoring series

  The CEPEJ Portugal country fiche records a 96.1% clearance rate for civil and commercial litigious cases at first instance in 2023, alongside 101.1% at second instance and 105.5% at the Supreme Court; first-instance disposition time was 267 days.

  96.1 % of incoming cases, first-instance civil and commercial clearance rate, 2023. 267 days, first-instance disposition time, 2023. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), Portugal country fiche, retrieved 2026-09-02.

  How it worked: Portugal's courts feed case-flow data into a recurring national and European monitoring framework, making incoming, resolved and pending civil cases visible by instance and allowing backlog pressure to be compared over time.

  Limits: The clearance rate is an administrative throughput measure for one year and one case class, not a judgment-quality, access-to-justice or public-trust measure. Disposition time is a theoretical estimate derived from pending and resolved cases, and rates differ sharply by court instance; CEPEJ republishes national data and the fiche cannot identify which reforms or court-management practices caused the result.