From the US, Albania’s new AI “minister” looks like a gimmick. But context matters. In a country where corruption corrodes trust in government, appointing a chatbot named Diella to oversee procurement could, in fact, be a smart tool for reducing abuse. Done well (and that’s a big if) this AI "minister" could help to make public services more transparent.
Albania Isn’t First: Seoul Did It a Quarter-Century Ago
Over twenty-five years ago in 1999, the Seoul Metropolitan Government launched the OPEN system (Online Procedures ENhancement for civil applications).
It created real-time transparency: citizens could see every step of a permit’s progress, who was responsible, and why decisions were made. Within a few years, it was voted the city’s most valuable policy, copied nationally across South Korea, and shared with UN member states as an anti-corruption blueprint.
Over twenty-five years ago in 1999, the Seoul Metropolitan Government launched the OPEN system (Online Procedures ENhancement for civil applications).
Before OPEN, getting a construction permit or sanitation approval meant repeated visits to a government office, endless paperwork, and frequent opportunities for officials to solicit bribes.
With OPEN, the entire process went online. Applicants could see exactly who was handling their case, when a decision was due, and what rules applied.
By removing face-to-face interaction and creating an auditable digital trail, OPEN reduced corruption complaints and improved trust. Researchers from Korea University, Inha University, and Yonsei University have shown that the system became so successful that it was adopted nationally in Korea and recommended internationally as a model for reform. "[I]t is widely considered a success. Citizens, public administration specialists, and government employees voted the OPEN system as the Most Valuable Policy of Seoul in 1999 and 2000. The OPEN system was also recognized by international organizations. In 2000, Kofi Annan, the then U.N. Secretary-General, and Koh, Mayor of Seoul, agreed to offer the OPEN system to 180 member nations of the U.N."
The lesson: when designed with leadership, oversight, and citizen access, digital systems don’t just save time—they change incentives and curb corruption.
The balance between too much and too little contact
Dismissing Albania’s project as a stunt misses the point. It is aimed at reducing human discretion in a domain (public procurement) long plagued by abuse. That doesn’t make it foolproof.
Past examples of overreliance on tech in government have been catastrophic. Consider the UK’s Post Office Horizon scandal, where faulty software led to the wrongful prosecution of more than 900 workers. People went bankrupt, lost homes, were imprisoned, and at least four took their own lives. But Horizon was not a story about technology. It was about bad leadership, secrecy, denial of error and malfeasance.
When citizens must rely on personal contact with bureaucrats, corruption flourishes. When they have no contact at all, powerful institutions can use digital systems to crush the powerless. The challenge is to find the balance: technology that makes government more transparent, not more opaque.
That’s why Albania’s experiment matters. If Diella is simply a mascot, it will fail. If it becomes a real channel for citizens to see how tenders are handled, who is responsible, and what rules are applied, it could take Albania closer to the Seoul model: reducing corruption by replacing hidden discretion with open process.
Too much personal contact with officials breeds corruption. Too little contact breeds injustice. The challenge is designing digital systems that provide the right kind of contact: transparent, auditable, and empowering.
Why this matters beyond Albania
The debate is not about whether AI is good or bad. It’s about design, oversight, and context. In the United States, appointing a chatbot minister may look like theater. In Albania, where procurement scandals are a persistent problem, it may be a way to rebuild trust.
As Spanish business school professor Enrique Dans notes: “It is significant that Albania has chosen to undertake this experiment: since emerging from decades of Stalinist rule in 1991, it has been plagued by patronage and corruption, but has now set its sights on accelerated accession to the European Union. If anything can improve the quality of its democracy, it is not more speeches, but greater transparency in adjudicating state-funded contracts. And AI, when used well, is a very good tool for monitoring such processes.”
The question isn’t whether an AI minister is silly, but whether governments design digital tools that citizens can trust. Albania may succeed or stumble — but the real lesson is that digital government, done well, can make government more accountable.