Inter-American Democratic Charter - OAS - Organization of American

Organization of American States 1

Tenth Anniversary of the

Inter-American Democratic CharterA Hemispheric Commitment to Democracy

01Establishing a Track Record for Promoting and Protecting Democracy by José Miguel Insulza, OAS Secretary General

02Chapter I: Democracy and the Inter-American System

Progress and achievements in: transparency; freedom of expression and of the press; the strengthening of parties and other political organizations; electoral campaigns and campaign financing

Chapter II: Democracy and Human RightsPromoting and protecting human rights, and efforts to eliminate all forms of discrimination, especially discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, and race

Chapter III: Democracy, Integral Development and Combating PovertyInter-American instruments to promote economic, social, and cultural rights; cooperation and exchange mechanism for integral development and combating poverty; initiatives for generating productive employment; support for environmentalconservation; and activities undertaken to promote access to quality education

Chapter IV: Strengthening and Preserving Democratic InstitutionsThe role of the OAS in preventing political-institutional crises and in the restoration of democracy following alterations of the constitutional order and interruptions of the democratic order

Chapter V: Democracy and Electoral Observation MissionsHelping to boost electoral institutions and processes; progress made with electoral observation

Chapter VI: Promoting a Democratic CulturePrograms and activities to promote democratic principles and practices and to strengthen a democratic culture, especially among children and youth; programs and activities to foster governance, sound management, and more robust political institutions and civil society organizations. Progress achieved with respect to full and equal participation by women in political bodies in the countries of the Hemisphere

03Toward Consolidation of the Collective Commitment to Democracyby Víctor Rico Frontaura, Secretary for Political Affairs

Con

tent

s

the Organization and each of the member states canuse in selecting priorities and initiatives, projects, andactions to be carried out in order to consolidate andstrengthen democracy.

Also built into the Democratic Charter is a collectivemechanism for defending democracy in the region.Foreseeing moments of instability and political crises, theregulatory framework set forth in the Charter providesfor diplomatic moves and joint action mechanisms for acollective response to threats to the democratic politicalintitutional process and the legitimate exercise of power.Over the past 10 years, these tools have played afundamental part in preventing the occurrence orexacerbation of destabilizing situations.

The tenth anniversary of the adoption of the IADCaffords an excellent opportunity to reflect on ten years ofexperience implementing it and to assess its legacy sofar. Generally speaking, we can say that ballots in theregion are transparent, secret, and universal; majorprogress has been made in the defense and protectionof human rights; the multilateral forum further developedby the Charter has been used to coordinate responses inthe fight against corruption; and the Charter has beeninvoked on at least nine occasions in situations thataffected or threatened the democratic politicalinstitutional process or a government’s legitimateexercise of power. On seven of those occasions,preventive application of the IADC was effective. TheOAS demonstrated its ability to respond to situations oftension or political-institutional crisis when member statesrequested its support.

In the case of Honduras, President José ManuelZelaya resorted to the OAS only 48 hours prior to thecoup d’état that overthrew him. Had he called upon theOrganization earlier, history might have been different.The OAS would have had more time and room formaneuver to prevent the chain of events that culminatedin his removal.

It is worth pointing out, however, that, once the coupd’état in Honduras had occurred, the Inter-AmericanDemocratic Charter, and, in particular, Chapter IV of it,was promptly and fully activated. In so doing, themember states and the Organization as such establisheda fundamental precedent: attacking democracy in theregion comes at a high diplomatic, political, andeconomic cost. The Charter establishes a set ofstandards and rules that have to be followed. Violatingthem, especially when that entails an unconstitutionalalteration or interruption of the democratic order, doesnot go unpunished; rather it unleashes severeconsequences for the violators. In that sense,implementation of the Democratic Charter is successful,inasmuch as it helps consolidate a democratic cultureand democratic practices.

Keeping systematic track of the record of theOrganization of American States in promoting anddefending democracy is one of the principal purposes ofthis publication. In the pages that follow, we attempt tooutline the various initiatives and actions undertaken bythe Organization in the ten years in which the IADC hasbeen in effect. This exercise may also be regarded asthe Organization’s rendering of accounts to the memberstates with respect to its interpretation andimplementation of the Democratic Charter. Finally, basedon experience to date and for the sake of that ideal of ademocratic republic referred to earlier, this publicationwill make it possible to outline a roadmap regardingfeatures and aspects that need to be strengthened byputting forward some proposals for enhancing theeffectiveness of the IADC in its two main thrusts: as acollective program for promoting and consolidatingdemocracy and as a collective mechanism for defendingand protecting it.

–José Miguel InsulzaOAS Secretary General


Democracy traveled a long distance,across sometimes treacherousterrain, before it took root and was

recognized as the region’s only legitimatepolitical system. For the first time in humanhistory, today “being democratic is anecessity.” The path to democracy woundthrough difficult stretches of militarydictatorships, authoritarian governments,internal armed conflicts characterized byhigh levels of political violence andsystematic repression by the State, andinterference by third countries in theinternal affairs of others. The years of thereturn to democracy in South Americacoincided with the fall of the Berlin Wall,the end of the Cold War, and thedemocratization of Eastern Europe. Thencame an end to the internal wars inCentral America and peace processesthat fostered the establishment ofdemocratic systems. Almostsimultaneously, Canada joined theOrganization of American States, alongwith most of the Caribbean states thathad remained outside it.

Nowadays, the only legitimate way totake power is through transparent,competitive, and periodic elections; otherroutes to power have been ruled out. Thisis no small achievement for a region thatfor years swung betweenauthoritarian/military and democraticgovernments. In turn, that consolidation ofelectoral processes as the only legitimatepath to power had major implications forthe establishment of electoral institutions,expansion of the electoral roll, civilregistries, and the development ofpolitical and civil citizenship, amongother spin-offs. At the last OAS GeneralAssembly, held in San Salvador in June2011, all 34 Heads of State andGovernment attending it had beenelected democratically, in elections whoseresults no one questioned. Furthermore,

Honduras, too, participated in that regional Assemblyafter regaining full membership of the Organization.

The road to democracy was paved by a number ofprotagonists committed to democratic values andprinciples. Their efforts were underpinned by regionalsynergies captured in resolution 1080, adopted at theOAS General Assembly session held in Santiago, Chile,in 1991, and the Protocol of Washington of 1992. Forthe first time ever, the states of the Americas reachedagreement on defending their democracies andresponding jointly to any threats to their continuity. Thisregional commitment to democracy deepened over theyears, culminating in the unanimous adoption of theInter-American Democratic Charter (IADC) on September11, 2001, at a special session of the OAS GeneralAssembly, held in Lima, Peru.

The Democratic Charter is a manifesto, a collectiveaffirmation and recognition of representative democracyas the only legitimate form of government in theAmericas. Leaving behind difficult decades ofdictatorships and armed conflicts, a new process beganof garnering consensus regarding the importance andvalue of democracy as a form of government, State, andsociety. The destabilizing moments that several incipientdemocracies endured initially, as they learned the ropes,ultimately served only to reinforce that consensus. TheInter-American Democratic Charter, enshrining as it doesa collective commitment to maintain and strengthendemocracy in the Americas, may be considered the highpoint of that regional consensus.

The Charter managed to crystallize a broad definitionof democracy. It outlines a series of “essential elementsof representative democracy” and core components ofthe exercise of democracy. By incorporating them, theDemocratic Charter transcends the notion of electoraldemocracy, going beyond the democratic origins ofpower to include its democratic exercise as well.Democracy is not just about being electeddemocratically: it also means governing democratically.

In defining the essential elements of representativedemocracy and the core components of its exercise, theInter-American Democratic Charter may be said toresemble a “program of the Democratic Republic” Likeany political program, it includes an ideal to be reachedand it maps out the general direction for member statesto chart. This republican democracy paradigm, in turn,is crucial for establishing programmatic guidelines that

2 10 Years of the Inter-American Democratic Charter

Intro

duct

ion

Intro

duct

ion

Building a Track Record of Promoting andProtecting Democracy

the essential elements of representative democracy:respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms;access to and the exercise of power in accordancewith the rule of law; the holding of periodic, free, andfair elections based on secret balloting and universalsuffrage as an expression of the sovereignty of thepeople, the pluralistic system of political parties andorganizations, and the separation of powers andindependence of the branches of government. InArticle 4, the Inter-American Democratic Charter refersto the following as essential components of theexercise of democracy: transparency in governmentactivities, probity, responsible public administration onthe part of governments, respect for social rights,freedom of expression and of the press, and thesubordination of all institutions and sectors of societyto the legally constituted civilian authority and to the

rule of law. Article 5 regards the strengthening ofpolitical parties and other political organizations as apriority for democracy.

Thus, in the first Chapter of the Democratic Charter,the member states define the contents and scope ofdemocracy. It is important to point out that thedefinition refers not just to the origins of a democracy;i t also contains a set of essential elements ofrepresentative democracy and core components ofhow it is exercised. The Charter pinpoints a corpus ofvalues, principles, and rights around whichdemocratic institutions, relations between the Stateand citizens, and relations among citizens arestructured. This set of ingredients make up what maybe cal led the "republican" organization ofgovernment. For that reason, the IADC may beconstrued as “the program of the Democratic

Organization of American States 54 10 Years of the Inter-American Democratic Charter

Dem

ocra

cy a

nd th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Sys

tem

Dem

ocra

cy a

nd th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Sys

tem

Democracy and the Inter-American System

IThe member states included a broad and

comprehensive definition of democracy in theInter-American Democratic Charter, with a

detailed specification of what i t entails. Afterproclaiming in Article 1 that the peoples of theAmericas have a right to democracy, the IACDestablishes (Article 2) that the effective exercise ofrepresentative democracy is the basis for the rule oflaw and of constitutional regimes. It then goes on tostate that representative democracy is strengthenedand deepened by permanent, ethical, and responsibleparticipation of the citizenry within a legal frameworkconforming to the respective constitutional order.Participation is specifically addressed in Article 6,where it is described as a necessary condition for thefull and effective exercise of democracy. Article 3 lists

©MICHEL HUNEAULT

During the Third Conference of the States Parties,held in Brasilia, Brazil, on December 9 and 10,2010, three more states joined the mechanism, so thatcurrently there 31 states in the region forming part ofthe MESICIC.

Monitoring of implementation of the Inter-AmericanConvention against Corruption (MESICIC) is donethrough reciprocal evaluation processes among theStates Par t ies. In each evaluation round, theCommittee of Experts analyzes how states areimplementing previously selected provisions of theConvention. Once the rounds have concluded,national reports are drawn up, containing concreterecommendations to the evaluated states, along with aHemispheric Report. Civil society organizations takepart in these analytical processes, providing usefulinformation complementing that provided by therespective states.

By the time this publication went to print, threerounds of analysis had taken place at 19 regularmeetings of the Committee of Experts. As of the fourthround of analysis, to begin in 2012, the process willinclude on site visits to the States Parties.

Further activities were also carried out in connectionwith the Mechanism: the National Action PlansProject (2005-2010), designed to help 17par t icipating states develop action plans forimplementing the recommendations of the MESICIC;and two Conferences on the Progress andChallenges in Hemispheric Cooperationagainst Corruption, held in Lima, Peru (2010) andCali, Colombia (2011).

ii. Guide to Mechanisms for the Promotionof Transparency and Integrity in the AmericasThe Guide to Mechanisms for the Promotionof Transparency and Integrity was written in2009 by the Depar tment of Effect ive PublicManagement (DEPM) of the OAS Secretariat forPolitical Affairs. The Guide is a reference tool and asource of shared experiences and best practices intransparency, integrity, prevention and control ofcorruption, all of which are fundamental componentsof the exercise of democracy, as stipulated in Article 4of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. It is aimed

at government officials, academics, and civil societyorganizations. Currently, it includes information on 13Central and Southern American countries. Informationon eight more South American and Caribbeancountries is to be included by the end of 2011.

Based on this Guide, three on-line courses havebeen taught since 2009, on “Mechanisms andStrategies for Promoting Transparency and Integrity.”Participating in the courses were 56 people fromdifferent countries in the Americas. A set of indicatorswas also developed to elicit systematic information onthe impact and scope of policies implemented with aview to promoting integrity and transparency in theHemisphere. The issues addressed in the Guide alsofostered the establishment of a network of specialistsin different countries in the region that could lay thefoundations for an observatory to monitor progress inthese fields.

iii. E-government ProgramThe advent of information and communicationtechnologies (ICTs), and their application andadaptation to improving and expediting governmentoperations may be considered a turning point in termsof opportunities for governments to promote andbroaden democracy among citizens. The introductionof e-government had a positive impact on one of thefundamental components of the exercise ofdemocracy: the transparency of government activities,probity, and responsible public administration on thepart of governments (Chapter 4 of the IACD). E-government is also a key tool for facilitating thedissemination of, and access to, information and forencouraging citizen participation in decision-makingprocesses and in oversight of public administration. Italso reinforces compliance with, and the exercise of,rights, values, and principles that the IADC establishesfor the citizens of the Americas.

For the past 10 years, the Department of EffectivePublic Management, in pursuit of the objectives of theDemocratic Charter, has striven to expand andstrengthen e-government in Latin America and theCaribbean through two core programs: technical andhorizontal cooperation, and the training andcertification of government officials.


Republic,” that is to say as an ideal to be striven forby pooling the efforts of the member states and of theOrganization of American States. With that in mind,taking the IADC as a paradigm, this document takesstock, 10 years after its adoption, of what theOrganization has done to implement the contents ofthe first chapter of the Charter. Specifically, the threecore issues addressed are: transparency, probity, andresponsible public administration on the part ofgovernments; freedom of expression and of the press,and the strengthening of political parties and otherpolitical organizations, together with the importanceof electoral campaigns and financing systems.

a. Transparency in government activities, probity, and responsible public administration on the part of governments (Article 4)

i. Inter-American Convention againstCorruption and the Follow-up Mechanism for theImplementation of the Inter-American Conventionagainst Corruption (MESICIC)The Inter-American Convention againstCorruption, adopted in Caracas, Venezuela, inMarch 1996, constitutes the first international legalinstrument in this field to recognize the overarchinginternational significance of corruption and the needto promote and facilitate cooperation among states inorder to fight it.

The purposes of the Convention are to promote andstrengthen the development of mechanisms needed toprevent, detect, punish, and eradicate corruption, andto promote, facilitate, and regulate cooperation

among states to ensure the effectiveness of measuresand actions to prevent, detect, punish, and eradicateacts of corruption in the performance of public office.

The Convention establishes a set of preventivemeasures: it provides for legal definition of specificacts of corruption as crimes, including transnationalbribery and illicit enrichment. It also contains a seriesof provisions for strengthening cooperation amongStates Parties in such areas as: mutual legal assistanceand technical cooperation; tracing, freezing,confiscation, and forfeiture of assets obtained orderived from the commission of acts of corruption; andothers.

Currently, 33 of the 34 active member states of theOAS have ratified the Convention.

The Follow-up Mechanism for theImplementation of the Inter-AmericanConvention against Corruption (MESECIC) isan intergovernmental instrument established within theOAS framework to support States Parties to theConvention in their efforts to implement its provisions.

The MESECIC came on stream in 2002, one yearafter adoption of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter. It may be considered a key instrument forassisting member states in their efforts to promote andguarantee transparency in government activities,probity, and responsible public administration on thepart of governments.

The MESECIC comprises: (a) the Conference ofStates Parties, which has the authority and overallresponsibility for implementing the mechanism; (b) theCommittee of Experts, which is responsible fortechnical analysis in implementing the Convention;and (c) the Technical Secretariat, which isoperated by the OAS General Secretariat, through theDepartment of Legal Cooperation of the Secretariat forLegal Affairs.


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Sys

tem

b. Freedom of Expression and of the Press (Article 4)

Article 4 of the IADC lists freedom of expression andof the press as one of the essential components of theexercise of democracy. Both freedoms are vital forensuring informed citizen participation, the exercise ofthe other rights of citizens, the establishment of aplurality of opinions reflecting the diversity to be foundin societies, and the possibility of exercising oversightof the performance of government authorities. Overthe past 10 years, the Special Rapporteurshipfor Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights hasplayed a key part in promoting and defendingfreedom of expression and of the press and the rightto access public information. Its recommendations andthe legal stances taken by the Commission in this fieldhave helped bring about structural changes via theadoption of legislative reforms and the implementationof public policies that have fostered guarantees for,and the observance and exercise of, these rights.

Also influential in promoting these freedoms is theTrust for the Americas, through its Journalism,Citizenship and Democracy Program and the RegionalAlliance for Freedom of Expression.

i. Special Rapporteurship for Freedom ofExpression of the Inter-American Commission onHuman Rights (IACHR)The Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom ofExpression (hereinafter, “Office of the SpecialRapporteur”) was created by the Inter-AmericanCommission on Human Rights (IACHR) in October1997, in order to promote and protect the right tofreedom of expression in light of its fundamentalimportance for the existence of democratic societiesand its contribution to the protection of all other rights.

Since its inception, the Office of the SpecialRapporteur has participated in the development ofinter-American freedom of expression standards,promoted their implementation within nationalsystems, and strengthened the capacity of states andcivil society organizations charged with defendingand promoting the right to freedom of expression. TheSpecial Rappor teurship monitors free speechdevelopments throughout the 35 member states of theOAS, issuing statements, press releases, and alertsregarding urgent threats to freedom of expression,while producing an annual report on the state offreedom of expression in the countries of theAmericas. At the same time, the Office participatesactively in the system of individual petitions before theInter-American Commission and Inter-American Courtof Human Rights, identifying priority cases, providingspecialized legal analysis to the Commission andCourt, and helping to develop and consolidate clearinternational legal standards in the areas of freedomof expression and access to information.

The efforts of the Office of the Special Rapporteur—and of the inter-American human rights system moregeneral ly—have achieved concrete resul ts inprotecting the right to freedom of expression in the


The Network of E-Government Leaders of LatinAmerica and the Caribbean (RED GEALC) wasfounded in 2003 and the DEPM/SPA serves as theNetwork’s Technical Secretariat. The idea is topromote horizontal cooperation among the countriesof Latin America and the Caribbean and to facilitateexchanges of solutions and experts in this field. To thatend, nine collaboration and exchange workshopswere organized, with the participation of more than80 senior officials from 32 countries. In 2007,ExcelGob awards were introduced to recognize thegovernments achieving most eff iciency andtransparency through the use of ICTs.

iv. Access to Public InformationAccess to public information is a key tool forpromoting accountability and transparency in stateinstitutions. It plays a fundamental role in efforts tocombat corruption and to facilitate participation andthe effective exercise of citizens’ rights. Various areasin the OAS work in this field, from different angles,including: the Special Rapporteurship for Freedom ofExpression of the Inter-American Commission onHuman Rights (see Chapter I, Section b. Freedom ofExpression and of the Press); the Department ofInternational Law; the Department of Effective PublicManagement, and Trust for the Americas (See ChapterI, Section b. Freedom of Expression and the Press)

In June 2009, the OAS General Assemblyinstructed the Department of International Law toprepare a draft Model Law on Access toInformation. The DEPM participated in the draftingof the Model Law and of the Guide for i tsImplementation. Both instruments are being used by agrowing number of OAS member states as a supportand reference tool for the adoption, improvement, andimplementation of their Access to Public Informationlegislation.


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Sys

tem

First, Latin America in particular has an alarming,lingering history of violence against journalists andimpunity with regard to such crimes. Between 1995and 2005, 157 journalists in 19 countries in theAmericas were murdered for reasons possibly relatedto the practice of their profession. Convictions (of anykind) were handed down in only 32 of these 157cases. Unfortunately, the violence continues. In 2010,27 journalists were killed in Latin America, while inthe first seven months of 2011 another 21 journalistshave been killed in circumstances possibly related tothe practice of their profession.

The second major challenge is the use of criminallaw to silence dissent. In spite of the aforementionedprogress in rolling back desacato laws, manycountries in Latin America still use criminal laws topunish speech, silence dissident voices, and inhibitsocial protest.

The third challenge is censorship. While enormousprogress has been made in eradicating direct priorcensorship in the region, several forms of indirectcensorship now pose a significant concern, includingthe arbitrary allocation of public resources; thearbitrary use of the mechanisms of regulation andoversight; and the creation of an environment ofintimidation that inhibits dissident speech.

The fourth major challenge is to guarantee access topublic information. In recent years, a number ofcountries have made significant progress in protectingthe right to access to information. Still, significantchallenges remain, as a number of countries still havenot enacted access to information laws and theaccompanying enforcement regimes, while in otherslaws exist but may fall short of inter-Americanstandards or lack effect ive implementationmechanisms.

The final challenge to freedom of expression is theexcessive concentration of media ownership andcontrol, and the resulting lack of pluralism anddiversity in the marketplace of ideas. This extreme

concentration of media ownership and control hascaused enormous sectors of the population—includingindigenous peoples, afro-descendants, women, andthe poor, especially poor women—to be excludedfrom the communicative process. More recently, publicmedia monopolies have emerged in some countries,raising similar concerns about a media environmentthat is insufficiently plural and diverse to guarantee thefree exchange of ideas: a necessary condition fordemocracy to thrive.

The five major challenges discussed can only bemet through the combined efforts of a variety ofactors, including governments, the press, and civilsociety. The inter-American human rights system, andparticularly its Office of the Special Rapporteur forFreedom of Expression, will continue to play animportant role in the struggle to strengthen freedom ofexpression in the Americas, supporting the efforts ofpolicymakers, press associations, non-governmentalorganizations and concerned citizens, while callinggovernments to account when they fall short ofhemispheric free speech standards.

ii. Trust for the AmericasThe Journalism, Citizenship, and DemocracyProgram promotes excellence in journalism byproviding face-to-face and on-line training in: accessto public information; strategic cooperation amongcivil society organizations, journalists, and the media;and promotion of human rights and democraticprinciples. Between 2005 and 2010, 210 trainingand technical assistance activities were carried out forsome 7,340 participants.

In 2006, Trust for the Americas fostered theestablishment of the Regional Alliance forFreedom of Expression. The Alliance is acollation of 22 civil society organizations from 14countries in the Hemisphere. Its objective is to promoteand defend freedom of expression and access topublic information through the exchange of bestpractices and access to experts in that field. In recentyears, the work of the Trust for the Americas, throughthe Alliance, has helped lead to the enactment ofaccess to public information laws in Guatemala,Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador.


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Sys

tem

Americas. Indeed, over the past decade, journalistsand civi l society advocates have successful lypetitioned the Inter-American Commission and Courtto strike down laws and judicial decisions thatrestricted free speech. Even more importantly, thestates in question have largely demonstrated theircommitment to upholding the right to freedom ofexpression by complying with the relevant judgmentsof the Inter-American Court and reforming theirdomestic legal regimes to reflect their commitmentsunder inter-American human rights instruments. In thelast decade, for example, Chile reformed i tsconstitution to do away with prior censorship;countries such as Uruguay, Argentina, Mexico, andPanama decriminalized speech regarding matters ofpublic interest; El Salvador passed a law recognizingthe right to access to information, making it the 17thcountry in the Americas to do so; the Federal SupremeCourt of Brazil struck down a dictatorship-era presslaw that resulted in censorship and imposed severepenalties for criminal defamation offenses; theConstitutional Court of Colombia issued a decisionprotecting the right to confidential sources; and theSupreme Court of Mexico struck down a vaguecriminal law that protected the honor and privacy ofpublic officials.

Furthermore, in the last decade, great progress hasbeen made in removing some—though not all—of themore nefarious speech prohibitions, such as desacatolaws, from the criminal codes of Latin Americancountries. These are just a few of the many examplesof progress that the Office of the Special Rapporteurhas observed, particularly as a result of judicialdecisions that apply inter-American standards onfreedom of expression.

Without wishing to belittle this undeniable progress,it is important to remember that significant challengesto freedom of expression continue to exist in theAmericas. The Office of the Special Rapporteur refersto these continuing challenges as its “HemisphericAgenda for the Defense of Freedom ofExpression.”


transparent system for their financing.” This Articlereflects the growing concern about the influence ofmoney on politics and, in particular, on democracy.Increased campaign costs mean that money exertsmore influence over key aspects of the electoralprocess, while unequal socioeconomic structures andthe concentration of public power cause asymmetriesin electoral competition, due to the differences in thepolitical parties’ access to funding. Political-electoralcontexts characterized by unequal access to (publicand private) resources and the increasing powerwielded by money in electoral processes have aharmful impact on democracy. First, they generateunequal conditions for those competing in elections,which directly affects participation possibilities andthe extent to which the poli t ical system isrepresentative. Second, they make political partiesdependent upon (licit and illicit) sources of revenue,altering the principle that each vote is equal andconditioning the way parties act with respect to theselection of candidates and the contents of theiragendas, as well as implementation of the legislativeand government agenda.

In 2004, reacting to the identification of theseissues, the OAS General Secretariat, through whatwas then known as the Unit for the Promotion ofDemocracy (UPD) and in conjunction with IDEAInternacional, conducted an initial comparative studyof the major characteristics of financing systems forpolit ical par ties and election campaign in 18countries in Latin America. In 2005, two more studieswere published on political financing: one on theCaribbean, and the other on Canada and the UnitedStates.

Based on the first study of political financing in theCaribbean and the reports of the OAS ElectoralObservation Missions in that subregion, theDepartment of Electoral Cooperation and Observation(DECO), of the Secretariat for Political Affairs (SPA),identified the need to strengthen and reform thepolitical campaign financing system. To achieve that,i t encouraged a debate among members ofparliament, electoral authorities, and civil societyrepresentatives to examine existing schemes anddiscern best practices. The main outcome of thatdebate was the drafting of model legislationregulating financing for political parties andelection campaigns. This model legislation waspresented by the General Secretariat and the ElectoralCommission of Jamaica to political leaders of 12 ofthe 14 Caribbean countries in September 2010.

In 2011, DECO, again in conjunction with IDEAInternacional, published a book enti t led:Financiamiento de los Partidos Políticos enAmérica Latina [Political Party Funding in LatinAmerica: An Overview]. By way of conclusion, itrecommended two broad analytical approaches: first,identifying existing conditions for funding politicalactivities and election campaigns in Latin America;and, second, assessing the impact of illicit financing.

Parallel to this research, given that Chapter V of theIADC sets parameters for political financing and forelectoral observation, the Department decided toinclude the financing variable as part of the terms ofreference of Electoral Observation Missions (EOMs).A Methodology for Observing Political-Electoral Financing Systems is therefore beingprepared to permit standardized, objective, andrigorous analysis of political-electoral financingsystems. This in turn will allow the Department to makemore precise recommendations, tailored to theparticular needs of each of the countries observed.

c. Strengthening of Political Parties and Other Political Organizations. Election Campaigns and Systems for Financing Them (Article 5)

Construed as a manifesto recognizing, extolling,promoting, and protecting representative democracy,the Inter-American Democratic Charter devotes anarticle specifically to mention one of the key vehiclesfor that representation: political parties and other

political organizations. Through Article 5, the Charteradvocates strengthening parties and other politicalorganizations as a priority for democracy.

In a representative democracy, parties serve anumber of key functions: they order citizens’ electoralpreferences; identify, aggregate, and channel citizens’demands and needs; they train leaders to occupyelective, political, and public offices, where theyperform a vital role in drafting laws and publicpolicies that affect the way a country is organized; itsfuture; the way society, the economy, and the Stateoperate; and the welfare of citizens.

Given the importance of political parties and otherpoli t ical organizations for the workings ofrepresentative democracy, in 2001, the OASlaunched the Inter-American Forum on PoliticalParties (IAFPP). The IAFPP (Spanish acronym:FIAPP) was established specifically to strengthen andmodernize political parties, pursuant to the mandatesin the Action Plans of the Summits of the Americas andin the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Theprincipal spheres of action included: (1) promotion ofpolitical reforms; (2) coordination of technicaladvisory services; and (3) dialogue through annualmeetings, regional training programs, and nationalforums. The IAFPP held four hemispheric meetings: inMiami (2001), Vancouver (2002), Cartagena deIndias (2003), and Brasilia (2003).

Article 5 of the Inter-American Democratic Charteralso establishes that: “Special attention will be paid tothe problems associated with the high cost of electioncampaigns and the establishment of a balanced and


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Sys

tem



Dem

ocra

cy a

nd H

uman

Rig

hts

administration. [See Chapter I: Democracy and theInter-American System].

Article 9 of the Democratic Charter advocateselimination of all forms of discrimination (gender,ethnic, and racial) as well as diverse forms ofintolerance; the promotion and protection of humanrights of indigenous peoples and migrants; andrespect for ethnic, cultural and religious diversity. Allthat contributes to the strengthening of democracy, theexpansion and exercise of citizenship, and promotionof citizen participation. The OAS is working on thepreparation of a series of inter-American instrumentsto address these challenges and it is assisting memberstates with their efforts to reform regulatory andinstitutional frameworks so that they, too, can addressthese issues. These endeavors involve strengthening aculture of inclusion, equality, and tolerance in keepingwith the principles and values underpinning andsustaining a democratic system.

Dem

ocra

cy a

nd H

uman

Rig

hts


Democracy and Human Rights

Article 3 of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter stipulates that one of the essentialelements of representative democracy is

respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms,and it does so because the effective exercise of humanrights is indispensable for the rule of law, citizenship,and democracy. The crucial importance of observingand protecting human rights for the consolidation ofdemocracy is evidenced by the fact that theDemocratic Charter devotes an entire chapter,Chapter II, to Democracy and Human Rights.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights(IACHR) is the entity, within the Organization ofAmerican States, that plays a central role for thepromotion and protection of human rights. In fulfillingthat role, the IACHR helps strengthen the democraticsystem in the region to the extent that it promotes two

central pillars of the rule of law: justice and freedomof expression. Using the case system, the Commissionresponds to complaints made by individuals andgroups of people, attending to demands for justiceand combating impunity. In addition, the legal stanceit takes on human rights issues and its actions basedon its positions encourage legal and institutionalreforms in the member states that are proper to ademocratic system. As regards freedom of expression,the work of the Inter-American Commission on HumanRights, through the Special Rapporteurship onFreedom of Expression, has led to the repeal, in adozen or so countries of the region, of desacato(contempt of public authority) laws and to theadoption of access to information laws, along withother key contributions. Those changes help toconsolidate democracy by allowing criticism of theauthorities without risk of reprisals. They also fostertransparency in public institutions and in public

II

Families, the Rapporteurship on Human RightsDefenders, the Rapporteurship on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples, the Rapporteurship on the Rightsof Persons Deprived of Liberty, the Rapporteurship onthe Rights of Afro-Descendants and againstDiscrimination, and the Rapporteurship on the Rightsof the Child.

These rappor teurships and units per form apromotional, advisory, and awareness-raising functionboth within and outside the Organization. Internally,the Rapporteurship on the Rights of Afro-Descendantsand against Discrimination advises the WorkingGroup of the Committee on Juridical and PoliticalAffairs of the OAS Permanent Council responsible forpreparing an Inter-American Convention againstRacial Discrimination. Likewise, since 2000, theRapporteurship on the Rights of Indigenous Peopleshas been counseling the Working Group responsiblefor drafting an American Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples.

Externally, through their studies, activities, andvisits, the thematic rapporteurships and units of theIACHR play an important role drawing attention to,and raising awareness of, pressing issues in theregion, to do, for instance, with the rights of womenand children; of persons deprived of liberty; ofmigrant workers and their families; of human rightsdefenders; of lesbian, gay, transsexual, transvestite,bisexual and intersexual (LGTBI) persons; of Afro-descendants; and the rights of members of indigenouspeoples, and so on.

iv. IACHR Training CoursesAs part of its promotional and awareness-raisingwork, the IACHR attaches great importance to thetraining workshops it organizes for governmentofficials and members of civil society organizations onhuman rights issues and on the workings of the inter-American human rights system.

v. Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination(Article 9)A series of inter-American regulations are currentlybeing developed in the OAS to combat discriminationthat may serve as a guide and encourage memberstates to adopt or amend domestic laws along thesame lines.

The implementation of multilateral and nationalinitiatives aimed at eliminating the different forms ofdiscrimination and intolerance leads to changes incountries’ regulatory and institutional structures and,possibly, cultural patterns as well, thereby contributingto more just, supportive, and tolerant societies. That isan inseparable part of the legitimacy and self-sustainability of democracy and one that ties in closelywith the consolidation of the rule of law.

Initiatives to eradicate discrimination against personswith disabilitiesThe Inter-American Convention on theElimination of All Forms of Discriminationagainst Persons with Disabilities was adoptedin June 1999 during the twenty-ninth regular sessionof the OAS General Assembly (held in GuatemalaCity) and entered into force on September 14, 2001.

In 2007, a Committee for the Elimination ofAll Forms of Discrimination against Personswith Disabilities was established to follow up onthe commitments entered into under the Convention. Itcomprises one representative for each State Party. TheCommittee also serves as a forum for examiningprogress made with implementation of the Conventionand for sharing the experiences of the States Parties.

The States Parties undertook to present to theCommittee, every four years, a report taking stock ofmeasures adopted and progress achieved ineliminating all forms of discrimination against personswith disabilities. Those reports should also identifyobstacles hampering implementation of theConvention. So far, the Committee has met twice: inPanama City, Panama (in 2007) and in Brasilia,Brazil (in 2008).

At its thirty-sixth regular session (held in SantoDomingo, Dominican Republic, in June 2006), theOAS General Assembly declared 2006-2016 to bethe “Decade of the Americas for the Rightsand Dignity of Persons with Disabilities,” as away of achieving recognition for persons withdisability and the full enjoyment of their rights anddignity, including their r ight to par t icipate ineconomic, social, cultural, and political life and in thedevelopment of their societies, without discriminationand on an equal basis with others (AG/DEC.50(XXXVI-O/06). It also declared the need to undertakeprograms, plans, and measures to bring about theinclusion of and full participation by persons with


a. Promotion of Human Rights

i. IACHR visitsIn these past 10 years, the IACHR has conducted 79visits to member states at the invitation of the countriesthemselves. In some cases these were in situ visits toascertain the overall human rights situation; in others,they were visits by Rapporteurs to investigate aparticular problem or topic. These visits highlightspecific situations in which human rights are beingviolated either nationally or regionally. They generateawareness and exert some degree of pressure on themember states to take action. Furthermore, with aview to correcting irregularities, most of these visitsresult in the publication of a press release and areport that includes specific recommendations to thestates. With respect to such recommendations, theCommission remains at the disposal of the statesconcerned to assist implementation.

A good example of the first type of (in situ) visitmight be that carried out by an IACHR delegation inAugust, 2009, over a period of approximately twomonths, following the coup d’état in Honduras. Thatvisit helped generate international awareness of thegrave human rights consequences of the interruptionof the democratic order. In January 2010, the IACHRpublished an exhaustive report on the human rightssituation in Honduras in the context of the coup.Subsequently, in May 2010, it conducted a follow-upvisit after President Porfirio Lobo had been electedand had taken office.

As for the second type of visits carried out by theIACHR Rapporteurs, it is worth mentioning thoseconducted in the Bolivian Chaco in November 2006and June 2008 in order to compile information on theplight of Guaraní indigenous families subjected toservitude and forced labor akin to slavery. The visitand Report of the IACHR: Captive Communities:Situation of the Guaraní Indigenous People andContemporary Forms of Slavery in the Bolivian Chaco,supported the efforts of the Government to address thestructural problems of injustice and discriminationfaced by the indigenous peoples and farmingcommunities. In addition, the Government of Boliviavisited the headquarters of the IACHR in Washington,D.C., on March 11, 2008, for the public signing of aStatement of Commitment on the subject.

ii. Publication of IACHR ReportsOver the past decade, the Inter-American Commissionhas published 15 thematic reports, 11 countryreports, and other studies on both specific countriesand serious human rights concerns shared bycountries throughout the region. These reports containconcrete recommendations designed to orient andadvise countries so that they can comply with theirinternational human rights obligations. Thus theIACHR’s reports included the following, as well asothers:

• Terrorism and Human Rights (2002), withrecommendations to guide member states in theimplementation of counter-terrorism policies withfull respect for human rights.

•Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violencein the Americas (2007) containsrecommendations relating to the design of stateinter ventions and measures aimed atguaranteeing an appropriate judicial response toacts of violence against women.

•Citizen Security and Human Rights (2009)analyzes the issue of citizen security and itsrelation to human rights and puts forwardrecommendations to member states designed tostrengthen institutions, laws, policies, programs,and practices for preventing and curbing crimeand violence, pursuant to their internationalobligations to protect and guarantee humanrights.

• Rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples to theirAncestral Lands and Natural Resources (2009)points to parameters and best practices forenhancing the enjoyment of human rights by theindigenous and tribal peoples of the Hemisphere.

iii. Rapporteurships and Units of the IACHRPart of the internal structure of the Inter-AmericanCommission on Human Rights comprises, alongsidethe case system units, eight thematicrapporteurships and specialized units: theSpecial Rapporteurship for Freedom of Expression, theRappor teurship on the Rights of Women, theRapporteurship on Migrant Workers and Their


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd H

uman

Rig

hts

Draft Inter-American Convention against RacialDiscriminationA Working Group was established in 2005 toprepare the Draft Inter-American Conventionagainst Racism and All Forms ofDiscrimination and Intolerance. The IACHRRapporteurship on the Rights of Afro-Descendants andagainst Racial Discrimination and the Department ofInternational Law (DIL) of the Secretariat for LegalAffairs provide that Working Group with legal adviceand technical support. At the fourth plenary session ofthe General Assembly, held on June 8, 2010, themember states reaffirmed their commitment toconcluding negotiations on the Draft Inter-AmericanConvention against Racism and All Forms ofDiscrimination and Intolerance (AG/RES.2606 (XL-O/10)).

Inside the OAS, notable efforts have recently beenmade by the DIL to mainstream Afro-descendant issuesin the Organization’s policies and programs.

vi. Promotion and Protection of the Rightsof the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas (Article 9)The OAS member states embarked on a process ofnegotiations in the quest for points of consensusregarding a Draft American Declaration on theRights of Indigenous Peoples. To that end, aWorking Group was established in the Committeeon Juridical and Poli t ical Affairs of the OASPermanent Council. That Working Group receiveslegal advice from the Rapporteurship on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples of the Inter-American Commissionon Human Rights and from the Depar tment ofInternational Law of the Secretariat for Legal Affairs.

So far, the Working Group has met 13 times tonegotiate the Draft. Participating in the discussionsand negotiating sessions are representatives of themember states and, on average, some 70representatives of the indigenous peoples (at the lastcount: 28 women and 42 men).

As regards the future of the negotiations, AG/RES.2674 (XLI-O/11), adopted by the General Assemblyat its forty-first regular session (San Salvador, June,2011), renewed the mandate of the Working Groupand requested two more meetings in the quest forpoints of consensus.

In 2009, the Department of International Lawadopted the Program of Action to Strengthenthe Participation of Indigenous Peoples inthe Inter-American System. This Program pursuesa number of objectives relating to participation, theintegral development of communities, the highlightingof the rights of the indigenous peoples of theAmericas, and legal assistance in connection with thehuman rights of the indigenous peoples. Internally, theDIL is promoting the inclusion of indigenous issues inthe Organization’s different projects, activities, andbodies.

vii. Promotion and Protection of the HumanRights of Migrants (Article 9)Over the past 10 years, all the countries in the regionhave become countries of origin, transit, anddestination of migrants. Migrants and their familiesface multiple challenges, both during their journeyand in the countries they seek to stay in. Under thosecircumstances, the promotion and protection of thehuman rights of migrants, regardless of theirimmigration status, has become not just aninescapable political and legal issue on governmentagendas, but also one that obliges the OAS tocoordinate efforts in this field at the hemispheric level.The work of the OAS is organized around threeinitiatives: the Inter-American Program for thePromotion and Protection of the Human Rights ofMigrants Including Migrant Workers and TheirFamilies; the Migration and Development Program,and the Special Rapporteurship on Migrant Workersand Their Families.

.Migration management and policies with a humanrights perspectiveThe Inter-American Program for thePromotion and Protection of the HumanRights of Migrants Including MigrantWorkers and Their Families was prepared by aWorking Group of the Committee on Juridical andPolitical Affairs (CAJP), which completed its work inMay 2005. The Program was adopted by the OASGeneral Assembly in June 2005 through resolutionAG/RES. 2141 (XXXV-O/05), which first andforemost instructed the Permanent Council to convenespecial annual meetings of the CAJP, with theparticipation of experts from numerous sectors, toshare best practices and experiences of activities


disabilities; to promote effective measures to preventnew disabil i t ies; and to provide persons withdisabilities with access to rehabilitation services andprograms.

During that same session, through resolutionAG/RES.2230 (XXXVI-O/06), the General Assemblyrequested the Permanent Council to establish, in theframework of the Committee on Juridical and PoliticalAffairs, a working group to prepare aProgram of Action for the Decade of theAmericas for the Rights and Dignity ofPersons with Disabilities (2006-2016).

The Working Group received inputs to the draftsubmitted by Peru from the other member states andfrom pertinent bodies in the OAS, other regional andinternational organizations, and civi l societyorganizations. At its thirty-seventh regular session(held in Panama, in June 2007), the OAS GeneralAssembly adopted the Program of Action for theDecade of the Americas for the Rights andDignity of Persons with Disabilities (2006-2016) through resolution AG/RES. 2339 (XXXVII-O/07). To date, 16 countries have submitted progressreports on implementation of the Program of Action.

Within that framework, the Executive Secretariat forIntegral Development (SEDI) lends support to countriesin the region wishing to implement projects designedto guarantee access to the labor market and torehabilitation services for persons with disabilities.

Inter-American Program on the Promotion of Women’sHuman Rights and Gender Equity and Equality (PIA)The Inter-American Program on thePromotion of Women’s Human Rights andGender Equity and Equality (PIA) was adoptedby the OAS General Assembly in Windsor, Canada,in June 2000 (AG/RES. 1732 (XXX-O/00) and everyyear since then the member states have reiterated theircommitment to implement it.

The adoption of the PIA marked the crystallizationof a consensus among the member states regardingthe violence, discrimination, and unequal conditionsto which women are subjected. It recognized andasserted the need to take concrete steps to advancewomen’s rights, combat all forms of discrimination,and promote gender equity and equality from agender perspective.

The PIA entrusted the task of implementation to theInter-American Commission of Women (CIM). Varioussteps to implement the Program have been taken since2001, including gender training courses for OASprofessional staff responsible for drafting andexecuting policies and programs. Each year, the CIMproduces a report on implementation of the PIA, incollaboration with OAS secretariats, departments, andNational Offices.

Numerous changes over the past decade led theExecutive Committee of the CIM, in February 2010, toupdate and reactivate the PIA with the help of theCIM’s 2011-2016.Strategic Plan.

The Convention of Belém do Pará and the Mechanismfor Monitoring its Implementation The Inter-American Convention on thePrevention, Punishment and Eradication ofViolence against Women, known as theConvention of Belém do Pará (1994),established violence against women as a violation ofhuman rights and fundamental freedoms. It wasratified by 32 member states.

The Convention of Belém do Pará provides for twotypes of mechanism to protect and defend women’srights. One is the Protection Mechanism, based on thepresentation of individual and/or collective petitionsto the Inter-American Commission on Human Rightsand, subsequently, to the Inter-American Court ofHuman Rights.

The other is the Mechanism to Follow Up onImplementation of the Inter-AmericanConvention (MESECVI), established in 2004. ThisMechanism is based on systematic application of amultilateral and independent evaluation methodologyfor examining progress made with implementation ofthe Convention. A Committee of Experts appointed byeach of the States Parties is the technical bodyresponsible for analyzing and evaluating theConvention implementation process. The TechnicalSecretariat of the MESECVI is located in the CIM. Inthe six years since it was adopted, the Mechanism hasbeen applied twice.


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd H

uman

Rig

hts

important this instrument is, hundreds of human rightsdefenders throughout the region managed to agreewith their governments on security measures to protecttheir lives and the continuity of their work, based onprecautionary measures granted by the IACHR.

iii. SessionsIn April 2011, the IACHR held its 141st regular session.Since the advent of democracy in the region and itscontinuity over these past four decades, the IACHR hasconducted approximately 1,000 hearings that havehelped to move forward petitions, cases, andprecautionary measures and to achieve a much bettergrasp of human rights situations in particular countriesand in the region as a whole. A major step forward forstrengthening the inter-American human rights systemoccurred in 2007 with the first live transmission ofpublic hearings via the Internet.

iv. Friendly SettlementsIn the individual petition system, one of the IACHR’smain functions is to place itself at the disposal of theparties with a view to reaching a friendly settlement, ifthe parties deem it appropriate. These processes involvedialogue between the parties through the good officesof the Commission and constitute alternative solutionsthat resolve cases with some measure of satisfaction forthe injured party.

Friendly settlement procedures afford a uniqueoccasion for dialogue between states and individuals orgroups of individuals and they generate opportunities todiscuss, among other matters, reparation and measuresto prevent a recurrence of what happened. In theCommission’s experience, the friendly settlementagreements resulted in measures that, via legislation,public policies, and through institutional channels, hadample systemic effects in favor of respect for humanrights. For instance, in 2008, Argentina repealed theMilitary Justice Code and adopted a new system underwhich crimes committed by military personnel will bejudged by the regular courts, within the framework ofan amicable solution arrived at between the parties.More recently, in 2011, the State of Guatemala and thepetitioners signed an agreement in the Jacobo Arbenzcase in which the State committed to taking steps torestore the historic memory of the former Presidentoverthrown in a coup d’état perpetrated in 1954.

c. Prevention of Human Rights Violations

The inter-American human rights system was created todefend the individual rights of persons. Over time, as itsactivities developed, in addition to fulfilling that mandate,the Inter-American Commission helped bring aboutchanges in structural conditions that, if they had persisted,would have resulted in the violation of the human rightsof millions of persons. In decisions on individual orcollective cases, the IACHR analyzes the victims’ situationand recommends the measures needed to do justice andmake reparation to the victims. However, it also analyzesthe structural situation underlying the violation and makeslegislative and public policy, as well as other,recommendations for overcoming that situation. Thischanging role reflects the part that the IACHR played indealing with authoritarian governments and duringtransition periods and the role it currently has with respectto the consolidation of democracy.

One of the Commission’s major contributions to thecurrent process of consolidating democracy was todeclare the unacceptability of amnesty laws for humanrights violations in cases filed against Argentina,Uruguay, El Salvador, Chile, and Peru. That stancehelped bring to trial those accused of having perpetratedcoups d’état and murdered or disappeared thousands ofpeople. Another fundamental legal position taken by theIACHR in relation to the consolidation of democracy is itsinsistence on the subordination of the military to thecivilian authority. Consistent with that standpoint, theCommission pointed out that military courts are notcompetent to investigate, try, and punish the perpetratorsof human rights violations. Rather it is always incumbentupon the ordinary justice system to try those responsible.In recent years, Mexico and Argentina amended theirlaws in accordance with this principle and other countrieshave begun to debate the matter.

The judicial positions and recommendations of theIACHR have helped generate legislative and institutionalchanges that, in turn, have made it possible to overcomestructural elements that impaired the enjoyment andexercise of the rights of millions of people. In this way, theInter-American Commission on Human Rights also plays apreventive role against new human rights violations. That,too, is a vital contribution to the process of consolidatingdemocracy in the region.


carried out in the course of the year in support of theProgram and to propose new practices and activitiesfor inclusion in the Program. Accordingly, six annualspecial meetings have been held since 2006.

In 2007, the Permanent Council established theSpecial Committee on Migration Issues (CEAM). TheCommit tee holds regular meetings with theparticipation of a number of stakeholders andagencies in order to exchange information onmigration flows in the region focusing on identificationof best practices in migration management andpolicies and promotion of horizontal cooperation inthis field among member states.

Migration and DevelopmentIn 2008, the General Secretariat launched, under theExecutive Secretariat for Integral Development (SEDI),a Migration and Development Program (MiDE) to lendtechnical support to the CEAM and the WorkingGroup of the CAJP’s Inter-American Program for thePromotion and Protection of the Human Rights ofMigrants Including Migrant Workers and TheirFamilies.

MiDE endeavors to mainstream the migration issuewithin the OAS; coordinates the development andexecution of migration projects with several areas ofthe Organization; promotes t ies with otherinternational organizations specializing in this fieldand with regional consultation mechanisms onmigration; and fosters opportunities for constructivedialogue and cooperation among countries to reach abasic understanding of the issues and sharedguidelines regarding migration and migrants.

Promotion and protection of the human rights ofmigrants and their familiesA crucial role is also played, in this area, by theSpecial Rapporteurship on Migrant Workers and TheirFamilies of the Inter-American Commission on HumanRights. Its establishment reflects the concern of theOAS member states to attend to the needs of a highlyvulnerable group, by focusing on violations of thehuman rights of migrant workers and their familieswhen they find themselves in a country that is not theirown. Chief among the activities carried out by theRapporteurship is monitoring of policies and practicesthat affect protection and human rights guarantees formigrant workers and their families.

b. Defense of Human Rights

The Inter-American Democratic Charter devotes Article8 to the inter-American system for the promotion andprotection of human rights, to which any individual orgroup of people may resort to file complaints orpetitions, following certain established procedures, ifthey consider that their human rights have beenviolated. In the 10 years that have elapsed sinceadoption of the Charter, there has been a substantialincrease in the number of complaints and petitionsreceived by the Inter-American Commission. This trendis partly due to the spread of democracy which, in turn,promotes increasing awareness among citizens of theirrights and of their capacity to exercise them; todissemination of, and familiarity with, the work of theIACHR among the inhabitants of the Americas; and togrowing confidence in the inter-American system. Therehas also been an improvement in states’ compliancewith recommendations regarding human rights and intheir response with respect to human rights issues.

i. System of Petitions and CasesIn 2000, prior to the adoption of the Inter-AmericanDemocratic Charter, the Commission received 658petitions. By 2010, the number had risen to 1,598. Tobe able to respond to that increase, the IACHR madechanges to its Rules of Procedure, its structure, and itsinternal working procedures, which resulted in asustained increase in the number of petitions assessedeach year. Fur thermore, in recent years, theCommission managed to reduce its backlog of cases,despite the limited resources at its disposal.

Complying with IACHR recommendations in specificcases, countries in the region prohibited the recruitmentof minors for the Armed Forces; returned ancestrallands to indigenous peoples; publicly asked a largenumber of victims of human rights violations forforgiveness, and paid reparation to hundreds of victimsand family members of victims of human rightsviolations, among other significant achievements of thepetitions and cases system.

ii. Precautionary MeasuresThe IACHR protects the life and bodily integrity ofthousands of people by granting precautionarymeasures. Over the past 10 years, the Commission hasissued almost 500 precautionary measures, many ofwhich protect more than one individual. Illustrating how


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd H

uman

Rig

hts


Dem

ocra

cy, I

nteg

ral D

evel

opm

ent,

and

Com

batin

g Po

verty

Dem

ocra

cy, I

nteg

ral D

evel

opm

ent,

and

Com

batin

g Po

verty

ethnic, gender, and geographical divides. Forgingdemocracy also means bui lding "broadercitizenship," as can be deduced from Article 4 of theInter-American Democratic Charter, when it mentions"respect for social rights" as one of the essentialcomponents of the exercise of democracy. Realityshows us that without social and economicdevelopment, without the generation of opportunities,and with high levels of inequality, democracy losessupport, credibility, and meaning among the citizensof the Hemisphere.

Finally, this Chapter introduces two topics related tointegral development and "broader citizenship": theenvironment and education. Article 15 affirms that theexercise of democracy promotes the preservation andgood stewardship of the environment in order toachieve sustainable development for the benefit offuture generations. Access to quality educationavailable to all is described in Article 16 as a keyfactor with positive spin-offs at multiple, interconnectedlevels: it strengthens democratic institutions, promotesthe development of human potential, alleviates povertyand fosters greater understanding among our peoples.

In Chapter III, the Inter-American Democratic Charteracknowledges the virtuous circle generated by ademocratic political system, integral development,

and human rights. Just as the Charter itself is based ona broad and comprehensive vision of democracy, thisChapter embraces the notion of "broader citizenship,"transcending the spheres of the rights inherent inpolitical and civil citizenship to encompass economic,social, and cultural rights, as well. Thus, Article 13 ofthe IADC maintains the need to promote and observethese three types of rights since they are inherentlylinked to integral development, equitable economicgrowth, and to the consolidation of democracy in thestates of the Hemisphere.

The IADC echoes the importance of fostering a"broader citizenship" when it asserts in Article 11 thatdemocracy and social and economic development are

interdependent and mutually reinforcing It then goeson to state that poverty, illiteracy, and low levels ofhuman development are factors that adversely affectthe consolidation of democracy (Article 12). Given theharmful effects that these problematic social issueshave on democracy's ability to sustain and legitimizei tsel f over t ime, the Char ter establishes thecommitment of member states to adopt and execute allthose actions required to combat them, whilemaintaining macroeconomic equilibria. Furthermore,in Article 14, the member states agreed to conduct aperiodic review of the actions adopted and carriedout by the Organization to promote dialogue,cooperation for integral development, and the fightagainst poverty.

It transpires that this commitment to "broadercitizenship" is especially important in a region which,despite having begun its fourth decade of democracyand having experienced periods of sustainedeconomic growth, still has high poverty and extremepoverty indices and a highly skewed distribution ofwealth and income. These socio-economic differencesare exacerbated by the superimposition of racial,

Democracy, Integral Development, andCombating Poverty

III

Convention. Accordingly, since a Working Group wasformed and charged with preparing progressindicators, SEDI provides that Group with technicalsupport and assists negotiations among the memberstates regarding the indicators. Moving ahead with,adopting, and applying the Protocol's progressindicators would be one way of implementing Article13 of the IADC.

Also under way are discussions on a draft SocialCharter of the Americas, which uses a broaddefinition of democracy going beyond the politicalsystem sphere and including a broader citizenshipapproach. This instrument, promoted by theGovernment of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela,emphasizes integral development and social justicewith a view to eradicating extreme poverty, inequalityin the distribution of wealth and income, and socialexclusion. All these factors impair the full exercise ofcitizenship, undermine good governance, and runcounter to the consolidation of democracy in the statesof the Hemisphere. If it is adopted, the Social Chartercould be construed as an instrument that wouldfacilitate implementation of the provisions of Article13 of the IADC regarding the promotion andobservance of economic, social, and cultural rights.Since the draft Social Charter was first brought up fordiscussion in 2005, SEDI has been assisting with thedialogue concerning it and its Plan of Action.

c. Environment

As Article 15 of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter points out, the exercise of democracypromotes the preservation and good stewardship ofthe environment, and it is essential that the states ofthe Hemisphere implement policies and strategies toprotect the environment, in order to achievesustainable development for the benefit of futuregenerations. In that framework, SEDI, through theDepartment of Sustainable Development (DSD),cooperates with the member states in order toincorporate environmental considerations indevelopment plans and to facilitate technologytransfer mechanisms for environmental protection. Themain activities concern integrated and sustainablemanagement of water resources; the development and

use of renewable forms of energy; energy cooperationand efficient energy systems (the project run by theEnergy and Climate Partnership of the Americas);institution-building and strengthening of environmentallegislation; and the exchange of information for thesustainable use of biodiversity in the Americas.

d. Education

Given the beneficial crosscutting impact of educationalluded to in Chapter III of the IADC, it has pride ofplace among SEDI priorities. Between 2001 and2011, 13,429 scholarships were awarded foracademic and professional development studies;20,767 citizens of the Americas received trainingthrough the Educational Portal of the Americas;and the "Leo S. Rowe" Pan American Fundgranted 1,117 interest-free loans to students in theregion and OAS personnel.

Through the Regional Education IndicatorsProject (PRIE), SEDI, together with the UnitedNations Educational, Scienti f ic and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO), and Mexico's Secretariat ofPublic Education, assisted with the monitoring offulfillment of the Summits of the Americas educationsector goals. It also offered training and technicalassistance to ministries of education so as to boosttheir ability to produce data on the state of educationin their respective countries.

The Inter-American Teacher EducatorNetwork allows SEDI to provide assistance with thepreparation of teacher training programs throughoutthe Hemisphere. In this way, it helps to enhance oneof the essential components for all citizens to haveaccess to quality education (Article 16 of the IACD).

In 2007, the Ministers of Education of the regionsigned a historic Hemispheric Commitment toEarly Childhood Education. SEDI monitors andsupports that Commitment through a number ofprojects, one of them being a project it implements incooperation with the Bernard van Leer Foundation,which enables it to issue recommendations to thenational authorities to improve early childhoodeducation in rural and indigenous communities ineight countries of the Americas.


Through the Executive Secretariat for IntegralDevelopment (SEDI), the OAS assists memberstates in their efforts to reduce poverty and achievehigher levels of social and economic development.There are three main thrusts in SEDI's work: first, thefacilitation of hemispheric and intersectoral politicaldialogue aimed at sharing experiences and bestpractices and coordinating joint actions; second,support for the formulation of public policies in arearelated to integral development; and, third, humanand institutional capacity-building.

SEDI coordinates meetings of ministers and high-level authori t ies in education, labor, socialdevelopment, culture, sustainable development,tourism, competitiveness, science and technology,cooperation, and other areas. In these forums for high-level political debate, the member states forgeconsensus on a number of development-related issuesand adopt action plans. The implementation of thoseaction plans, and the follow-up to them, are carriedout through inter-American cooperation mechanismscomprising representatives of the countries' public andprivate sectors, as well as various regional andinternational institutions. Included in those mechanismsare 18 inter-American cooperation networkscoordinated by SEDI, among them the Inter-AmericanTeacher Educator Network and the Inter-AmericanSocial Protection Network. In keeping with Article 14of the IADC, the high-level meetings and the networkstighten ties between the countries' sectors andinst i tut ions and faci l i tate the communication,exchange, and transfer of successful experiences andlessons learned in key areas for integral development.

The programs and projects designed andimplemented by SEDI derive from action plansadopted by the political bodies. Over the past 10years, SEDI programs and projects provided technicalassistance and quality training through workshops,face-to-face and on-line courses. They also involvedcoordinating/preparing technical studies on issuesthat, in turn, shaped the formulation of public policiesand actions carried out by the member states. For itspart, the Par tnership for Development Fund ofFEMCIDI provided financial support for more than1,100 projects in education, culture, democracy,science and technology, trade, tourism, socialdevelopment, and sustainable development.

a. The Generation of Productive Employment as a Strategy for Combating Poverty and Fostering Social Inclusion

The Economic Empowerment Programorganizes forums for dialogue with authoritiesresponsible for trade and for Micro, Small, andMedium-sized Enterprises (MSMEs) and facilitatescooperation among them. The Program also serves toimplement projects focused on strengthening MSMEbusiness capacities, since those enterprises generatethe most jobs and therefore play a key part in povertyreduction and the promotion of social inclusion.Another project focuses on small enterprises in tourismand involves providing support with marketing andquality control of both products and services. Theproject started in the Caribbean and, given tourism'spotential as an engine for achieving economic andsocial welfare, it was replicated in other CentralAmerican and Andean countries.

The Inter-American Network for LaborAdministration seeks to enhance communication,cooperation, and technical assistance among laborministries in the region and among representatives ofworkers' and employers' associations, with a view tocapacity-building, achieving greater observance oflabor laws, promoting productive employmentgeneration, and improving working conditions. For itspart, the Inter-American Social ProtectionNetwork facilitates opportunities to share successfulexperiences and lessons learned regarding povertyreduction and job opportunities.

b. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

SEDI monitors implementation of the AdditionalProtocol to the American Convention onHuman Rights in the Area of Economic,Social, and Cultural Rights, “Protocol of SanSalvador,” which entered into force on November16, 1999 and has been ratified by 15 member states.The states parties undertook to prepare periodicrepor ts on measures taken to implement the


Dem

ocra

cy, I

nteg

ral D

evel

opm

ent,

and

Com

batin

g Po

verty

26 10 Years of the Inter-American Democratic Charter Organization of American States 27

Stre

ngth

enin

g an

d Pr

eser

ving

Dem

ocra

tic In

stitut

ions

Stre

ngth

enin

g an

d Pr

eser

ving

Dem

ocra

tic In

stitu

tions

Another important factor to be considered inattempting to understand the Organization's responseto situations that could place the democratic politicalprocess or the legitimate exercise of power in aparticular member state at risk is the strength andongoing validity of the principles of non-interventionand noninterference in the Hemisphere. The defenseof these principles conflicts with the commitmentespoused by the member states in the Inter-AmericanDemocratic Charter to protect democracy by means ofcollective action mechanisms. To overcome thatconfl ict, ways have to be found for makingapplication of the Charter more effective withoutviolating those principles.

In seven of the aforementioned cases, the Inter-American Democratic Char ter was appliedpreventively to avoid the escalation of a political-inst i tut ional crisis that could have placed thedemocratic process or the legitimate exercise ofpower at r isk and led to interruptions of thedemocratic order. In those cases, the dispatch ofmissions or special representatives and the openingup of channels for dialogue were some of themechanisms used effectively by the Organization todefuse highly destabilizing circumstances capable of

The Inter-American Democratic Char ter isrecognized as being the most complete inter-American instrument so far promulgated for

promoting and strengthening democratic principles,practices, and culture among the states of the region.It is also the instrument to which the governments ofthe member states of the Organization resort whenfaced with circumstances that threaten democraticinstitutional processes or the legitimate exercise ofpower. The Inter-American Democratic Charter placesat the disposal of the member states, the PermanentCouncil, and the Secretary General diplomaticinstruments and collective action mechanisms in thecase of an alteration of the constitutional order orinterruption of the democratic order, with a view torestoring that order. I f an interruption of thedemocratic order has taken place and if diplomatic

initiatives prove unsuccessful, the IADC provides forthe possibility of punishing the member state bysuspending its right to participate in the OAS,

In the 10 years of the Charter's existence, ChapterIV has been invoked at least nine times, including thatof the coup d’état in Honduras. The application (or, asthe case may be, the non-application) of theprovisions of this Chapter has prompted criticism ofthe IADC and of the Organization itself. A series ofproposals were put to the OAS for rendering the Inter-American Democratic Charter more effective.

The decision as to whether to apply the IADCpreventively or in cases of an interruption of thedemocratic order depends on the will of the memberstate concerned and on the consensus or majoritiesgenerated among the other member states. This is notan insignificant detail, especially if one compares itwith other decision-making models used at themultilateral level. Negotiation, the quest for points ofconsensus, and the putting together of majoritypositions forces the 34 active member states toreconcile differences, in such a way that the decisionstaken are representative and reflect the collective will.Accordingly, a possible amendment of the IADC willrequire a consensus among all the member states.

Strengthening and Preserving DemocraticInstitutions

IV

After several months of negotiations, facilitated bythe OAS, the Carter Center, and the UNDP, theGovernment and the opposition (the latter havingformed a group called Coordinadora Democrática)signed the "Declaration of Principles for Peace andDemocracy" on October 15, 2002. Based on thatinitial agreement, a "Negotiation and AgreementRoundtable" was established in Venezuela onNovember 8. The OAS Secretary General wasappointed International Facilitator with the technicalsupport of the three organizations already involved.

During the mediation period, which lastedapproximately seven months (from November 8,2002 to May 23, 2003), two further agreementswere signed. The "Declaration against Violence andfor Peace and Democracy" was signed on February18, 2003, followed, on May 23, by the signing of the"Agreement between the Representative of theGovernment of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuelaand the Poli t ical Groups Suppor t ing i t andCoordinadora Democrática and the Political and CivilSociety Organizations Supporting it." The latteragreement proposed an electoral way out of the crisis.Pursuant to that proposal and to conclude OAS effortsto help overcome the crisis, the Organization sent anElectoral Observation Mission on August 15, 2004, inorder to observe the Presidential Recall Referendum,which took place in an orderly and peaceful manner.

Nicaragua 2005

In June 2005, the OAS sent a special mission toNicaragua at the request of President EnriqueBolaños, in order to facilitate dialogue between theGovernment and the major political parties. Theinstitutional-political crisis was unleashed by thePresident's refusal to publish a partial reform of theConstitution that, generally speaking, tilted thebalance of power in favor of the Legislative Branch, tothe detriment of the Executive. That decision by theExecutive prevented the partial reform from enteringinto force and triggered a clash between the Executiveand Legislative branches of government. The SupremeCourt of Justice became involved in the dispute whenit ratified the constitutional amendments introduced bythe National Assembly.

The turn events were taking and the impassecreated between the branches of government led theGovernment of Nicaragua to request the deploymentof a mission of the Organization of American States.To that end, on June 7, 2005, the OAS GeneralAssembly, invoking Article 18 of the IADC, adoptedAG/DEC. 43 (XXXV-O/05) which declared the need

to send to Nicaragua, as soon as possible "a missionheaded by the OAS Secretary General that helps toestablish a broad national dialogue, with a view tofinding democratic solutions to the serious problemsthat exist."

The Special Mission spent f ive months inNicaragua, from June to October 2005, facilitatingthe political dialogue derived from the adoption of theFramework Law on Stability and Governance of theCountry. The Framework Law incorporated theagreements reached among the political factions,including suspension of enactment of the constitutionalreform. It also established the conditions of normalityneeded to conduct the electoral process, which tookplace in March and November 2006. Finally, theFramework Law institutionalized relations between thepolitical factions, establishing a Forum for Dialogue,which facilitated law-making, with the Catholic Churchand the OAS participating as guarantors.

The OAS work of facilitating an end to the crisisculminated with the deployment of an ElectoralObservation Mission, which was present during theregional elections on the Atlantic Coast on March 5,2006, as well as during the presidential andlegislative elections held on November 5 of that year.

Ecuador 2005

In response to a request by the Government ofEcuador, the OAS Secretary General appointed aSpecial Mission to observe the selection of membersof the Supreme Cour t of Just ice from June toNovember, 2005. The Special Mission was conductedpursuant to resolution 883, adopted by the PermanentCouncil on May 20, 2005, which invoked Article 18of the IADC.

When the Mission arrived, the country had gonewithout a Supreme Court (CSJ) for more than a year.Twice—in December 2004 and in April 2005—thejudges of the CSJ had been dismissed. The first time,in December 2004, the dismissals had not led to anymass protests. In April 2005, after new judges hadbeen installed, they decided to annul the charges ofcorruption leveled against former President AbdaláBucaram, thereby making it possible for him to returnto the country. That decision roused the population ofQuito. In an attempt to contain the mobilization of thepopulation and stem the discontent, the Presidentagain dismissed the Court and decreed a state ofemergency. That last decision incensed the ire of thepeople even more and increased protest againstGutiérrez's government. Under those circumstances,Congress authorized the dismissal of the President,"for abandonment of office," under Article 167 of the


seriously disrupting the democratic order. Thesepreemptive diplomatic initiatives by the OAS and itsmember state reveal a touch of boldness andcreativity, within the parameters of the DemocraticCharter, that turned out to be necessary for dealingwith situations in which the continuity of democracywas at risk.

Two of the nine cases in these 10 years in which theIADC has been in force—Venezuela (2002) andHonduras (2009)—are regarded as interruptions ofthe democratic order. In the second, Honduras, case,the Organization reacted promptly within theframework of the Inter-American Democratic Charter,by applying it fully and forcefully.

Looking back, one can say that application ofChapter IV of the Charter was, in this case, a success.In this assessment of how the IADC has performed,specifically with respect to the defense of democracy,it is important to review the cases in which it did notwork: Venezuela (April 2002), when President HugoChávez was removed from office unconstitutionally;and Ecuador (December 2004), when President LucioGutiérrez dissolved the Supreme Court of Justice.While all cases in which the IADC was invoked teachus lessons and help us to identify best practices, thesetwo instances in which the Charter turned out to beineffective point to three defects in the instrument. Inthe case of Venezuela, difficulties in reaching aconsensus or a substantial majority impeded thePermanent Council from reaching an expeditiousdecision when faced with the interruption of thedemocratic order in that country. For its part, Ecuadordemonstrated how the restrictions on ways to begintriggering Chapter IV of the IADC limit its application,especially preventively. The Ecuador case also drawsattention to the lack of clear criteria for defining when,and to what extent, the OAS is faced with analteration of the const i tut ional order or anunconstitutional interruption of the democratic orderwarranting actions by the Organization.

Following are instances in which the OAS, underChapter IV of the IADC, acted soon and effectivelyenough to prevent destabilizing situations and defenddemocracy.

Venezuela 2002-2004

The first time the OAS acted in defense of democracyunder the IADC framework was in response to theinterruption of the democratic order in Venezuela inApril 2002. The implementation of several substantivereforms by the Government of President Hugo ChávezFrías created a highly polarized situation. On April12, 2002, the clash turned violent and human lives

were lost. That same day, General Lucas Rincón, theMinister of Defense, announced that President Chávezhad been dismissed. A "Democratic Transition andNational Unity Government" was constituted andPedro Carmona Estanga, President of Venezuela’sFederation of Chambers of Commerce andManufacturers' Associations (Fedecámaras) wasappointed to head it. Following his appointment, thede facto President abolished the Constitution anddissolved the branches of government, including theNational Assembly and the Supreme Court. Thosedecisions exacerbated citizens' rejection of theinterruption of the constitutional order and led amajority faction of the Armed Forces to support arestoration of the legally constituted Government. OnApril 14, Hugo Chávez was restored as constitutionalPresident of Venezuela.

Faced with this crisis, the OAS Permanent Councilmet on April 13, 2002 and, for the first time, appliedChapter IV of the IADC (specifically, Article 20) andadopted resolut ion 811. CP/RES.811, whichcondemned "the alteration of constitutional order" andthe acts of violence that had led to the loss of humanlife. It also called for "the normalization of thedemocratic institutional framework in Venezuela " anddecided to send "as a matter of urgency, a Missionheaded by the Secretary General of the OAS, withthe aim of carrying out a fact-finding mission andundertaking the necessary diplomatic initiatives,including good offices, to promote as quickly aspossible the normalization of the democraticinstitutional framework." It also convoked "a specialsession of the General Assembly."

At its twenty-ninth special session, on April 18, theGeneral Assembly adopted AG/RES. 1 (XXIX-E/02),in which it expressed "satisfaction at the restoration ofthe constitutional order and the democratically electedgovernment of President Hugo Chávez Frías." It alsosupported "the initiative of the Government ofVenezuela to convoke immediately a national [....]dialogue."

On June 4, 2002, the OAS General Assemblyadopted the "Declaration on Democracy inVenezuela," AG/DEC. 28(XXXI-02), and encouraged"the Government of Venezuela to explore theopportunities the OAS affords for promoting thenational dialogue that is currently taking place inVenezuela and that was convoked by President HugoChávez Frías in the interests of deepening nationalreconciliation." Along those same lines, on August 14,the Permanent Council adopted resolution 821, inwhich it reiterated the readiness of the OAS toprovide support to further the process of dialogue,and it supported the good offices of the Organization,the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),and the Carter Center.


Stre

ngth

enin

g an

d Pr

eser

ving

Dem

ocra

tic In

stitu

tions

resolut ion, the Organization suppor ted theconstitutional Government of Guatemala and, amongother decisions, instructed the Secretary General toprovide full cooperation by the Organization at therequest of the Government of Guatemala to strengthenand preserve the democratic institutional system in thatcountry.

Pursuant to that resolution, the Secretary Generaland the Secretary for Political Affairs traveled toGuatemala with a view to supporting its ConstitutionalGovernment. The two officials met with the country'spolitical and social leaders and offered political andtechnical assistance to the Government of Guatemala.The preemptive diplomacy employed by theOrganization prevented the crisis from escalating intoa destabilizing situation.

Paraguay 2009

As soon as President Fernando Lugo took office, inAugust 2008, the OAS General Secretariat placeditself at the disposal of the Government of Paraguayfor promoting democratic governance in that country.

On March 3, 2009, the Secretary General tookpart in a seminar organized in Asunción, by the OASSecretariat for Political Affairs (SPA) on the region's

experiences with judicial reform. The seminarcoincided with a political debate in Paraguayregarding the appointment of new Supreme Courtjustices. Against that backdrop, the Secretary Generalunderscored the importance of the institutional statusand independence of the judiciary.

On September 7, 2009, the Secretary Generalagain visited Paraguay at a time when, for lack ofpolitical agreements, the Government was finding itdifficult to advance its reform agenda. The presenceof the Secretary General and the meetings he heldwith the different political players helped to underlinethe impor tance of s table inst i tut ions and ofopportunities for dialogue.

Finally, on December 16, 2009, the SecretaryGeneral sent a mission to Paraguay to lend support tothe efforts of the Government of President FernandoLugo to engage in a political dialogue with differentsectors in society aimed at overcoming the obstaclesto implementation of its policies and addressing theincipient threats to democratic stability. The Missionassessed the situation and offered the ParaguayanGovernment OAS assistance with facilitating, if needbe, a national dialogue, which in the end did notmaterialize.


Constitution. The Legislature then proceeded to adoptthe Amendment of the Organic Law of the Judiciary todetermine the mechanism for selecting judges andalternate judges of the Supreme Court of Justice.However, various segments of society regarded thatamendment as unconstitutional. Given that societywas divided concerning the constitutionality of theamendment to the Organic Law of the Judiciary andwidespread skepticism as to the criterion for selectingthe members of the Supreme Court, the OAS Missionhelped in three ways to overcome the political-institutional crisis besetting the country. First, it helpedbuild an atmosphere of trust in society based on astrategy of establishing contacts and communicatingwith the media. Second, it supported the installation ofa selection committee and assisted its activities. Third,the Mission helped persuade the Finance Ministry totransfer resources to the selection committee to enableit to begin operating without delay. The OAS presenceensured transparency in the process of selecting andappointing the judges of the Supreme Court andthereby helped uphold the credibi l i ty andindependence of the principal judicial organ.

Bolivia 2008

The actions undertaken by the OAS in Boliviastemmed from a request by the Government ofPresident Evo Morales and aimed to facili tatedialogue with the opposition. Forming the backdrop tothe Organization's diplomatic moves and good officesin this case were clashes regarding the new PoliticalConstitution. The central government was faced withopposition from certain sectors, especially the prefectsand civic committees of the departments in the so-called "half-moon," which were demanding greaterautonomy.

On March 4, 2008, the Minister of Foreign Affairsand Worship of Bolivia, David Choquehuanca,addressed the OAS Permanent Council to requestassistance with the referendum for approving Bolivia'snew State Constitution scheduled for May 4 of thatyear. On April 26 and May 2, the Bolivian Minister ofForeign Affairs again addressed the PermanentCouncil to describe the political events that weretroubling the countr y and the Consti tut ionalGovernment and to request OAS assistance underArticle 17 of the IADC.

On May 3, 2008, the Permanent Council adoptedresolution 935, "Support for the Process of Dialogue,Peace, and for Democratic Institutions in Bolivia,"through which it reaffirmed the readiness of theOrganization to provide such suppor t as theGovernment of Bolivia might require in implementing

the process of dialogue and to strengthen i tsdemocracy. It also instructed the OAS SecretaryGeneral to continue to use his good offices to promotedialogue and build consensus in Bolivia; to which endSpecial Representatives were appointed.

In order to comply with the mandate arising fromthe resolut ion, the OAS closely monitoreddevelopments in the political situation in Bolivia andthe Special Representatives visited Bolivia severaltimes to open channels of communication betweenpolitical and social players who were not talking toeach other directly. This "itinerant diplomacy" servedto establish a dialogue through intermediaries, identifyareas of agreement, and use institutional channels toovercome political discrepancies.

The Organization also acted as guarantor of thetransparency of the recall referendum for the office ofPresident and of eight of the nine prefects, which tookplace on August 10, in the presence of an OASElectoral Observation Mission.

In October, the OAS also participated in thedialogue between the Central Government and theprefects and helped facilitate dialogue amongsenators and representatives of all the politicalfactions in Congress. Finally, the OAS used its goodoffices and was present, along with other internationalorganizations, in the negotiations at the roundtableinstalled in the National Congress. The OAS presencefacilitated the negotiations leading to a politicalagreement among the parties and adoption of thenew Political Constitution of the Plurinational State ofBolivia.

Guatemala 2009

Democratic stability in Guatemala was jeopardized inMay 2009 by the assassination of attorney RodrigoRosenberg. The attorney had left a video recordedbefore his death on May 10 of that year, accusingPresident Álvaro Colom and other people in his innercircle of responsibility for his death.

When the video became known, Guatemalansociety split in two, with some sectors mobilizingagainst the Government and calling for the temporaryresignation of the President pending an investigation,and others demonstrating their support.

In light of the potentially destabilizing nature of theevents of May 10, the Minister of Foreign Affairs ofGuatemala, Roger Haroldo Rodas Melgar, addressedthe Permanent Council and told the representatives ofthe member states what was happening in his country.In order to avoid destabilization of the democraticconstitutional order, on May 13, 2009 the PermanentCouncil adopted resolution 950. Through that


Stre

ngth

enin

g an

d Pr

eser

ving

Dem

ocra

tic In

stitu

tions

Ecuador 2010

On September 30, 2010, a police riot broke out inEcuador. Faced with the imminent risk of an alterationof the constitutional order, the Permanent Council metin special session at the request of the PermanentRepresentative of Ecuador to the OAS, AmbassadorMaría Isabel Salvador. After analyzing the crisis in thecountry, the member states adopted resolution 977 byacclamation on the same day as the police uprising.They repudiated what had happened; expressed firmsupport for the constitutional Government of RafaelCorrea; and made a strong appeal to Ecuador's lawenforcement personnel, as well as to the political andsocial sectors, to avoid all acts of violence that couldfurther exacerbate the situation of political instabilitythe country was undergoing. The resolution also askedthe Secretary General to offer "the Organization’s fullcooperation, at the request of the Government ofEcuador, to preserve the democratic institutionalsystem in that country."

Pursuant to the mandate in that resolution, theSecretary General traveled immediately to Ecuador toexpress his support for and solidarity with thePresident. The immediate response by both thePermanent Council and the Secretary General of theOAS quickly helped contain the crisis and dissuadethe destabilizing sectors from further action. Otherdetermining factors were the backing of the citizenryand the suppor t of the Armed Forces for theconstitutional Government of Ecuador.

Haiti 2010-2011

At the request of the Government of Haiti, theOrganization of American States (OAS), together withthe Caribbean Community (CARICOM), dispatched aJoint Electoral Observation Mission on August 3,2010 to prepare for the presidential and legislativeelections scheduled for November 28, 2010. Theelections were of great strategic importance becausethe government to emerge from them would have todirect the country's reconstruction efforts.

The lack of credibility of the Provisional ElectoralCouncil (CEP) was one obstacle to the success of theelections. That distrust had led several political partiesto boycott the elections. Those circumstances causedthe Mission to play a more proactive role in shoringup the process.

The first round was marred by accusations of fraudand, in particular, by the demand of 12 of the 19

candidates that the elections be annulled. In Port-au-Prince, as well as other cities, acts of violencepunctuated the voting and there were seriousirregularities on election day. Those occurrencesposed a threat to the entire electoral process. Underthose circumstances, the part the Mission played wasvital for determining the validity of the elections. OnNovember 29, the Joint Electoral Observation Missionstated that, although the elections had been marredby extensive irregularities, the latter were not sufficientto invalidate the process as a whole. This statementhelped to defuse a tense situation and gave theelectoral authorities time to tally the actual votes.However, when the provisional resul ts wereannounced, which meant that candidate and currentPresident Michel Martelly would not be eligible to takepart in the second round, there were popular uprisingsin Port-au-Prince and Les Cayes that brought those twocities to a standstill for four days. Consequently,President René Préval, after having failed to establisha national verification commission, once again turnedto the Organization of American States to establish aMission of Experts to Verify the Vote Count.

The Mission, comprising experts from member statesand observer countries, delivered its official report tothe Haitian Government on January 13, 2011. Thereport recommended that the electoral authoritiesexclude 234 irregular tally sheets. The ElectoralTribunal took the recommendations of the Mission ofExperts into account and, at the challenging of resultsphase, ruled that Mirlande Manigat and MichelMartelly would pass to the second round.

When the second round of elections took place onMarch 20, 2011, a considerable improvement wasnoticeable. The defusing of political tensions alsocontributed to a peaceful second round. Theprovisional results of the legislative and presidentialelections were published on April 20, 2011, withouttriggering any adverse reactions. Nevertheless, at thechallenging of results phase, there were accusationsof corruption that culminated in questioning of theresults for 17 seats in the house of representatives andfor 2 in the Senate. To solve this new crisis, theExecutive asked the Joint Electoral ObservationMission to review the decisions of the ElectoralTribunal and make recommendations. The Missionrecommended keeping to the preliminary results in allthe cases analyzed. Subsequently, the electoralauthorities decided to set up a Special Tribunal, whichdecided to keep to the preliminary results in 13 of the17 cases queried in respect of representatives and inthe cases of the two Senate seats. The four remainingcases have not yet been resolved.


Honduras 2009-2010

On June 26, 2009, the Government of the Republic ofHonduras requested the Permanent Council forassistance under Article 17 of the IADC. Given thatthe events posed a threat to the democratic politicalprocess and the legitimate exercise of power, thePermanent Council adopted resolution 952, throughwhich, along with other measures, it instructed theSecretary General "to establish a Special Commissionto visit Honduras as a matter of urgency, with a viewto analyzing the facts and contributing to broadnational dialogue aimed at finding democraticsolutions to the current situation." The SecretaryGeneral immediately established the SpecialCommission, which was due to travel to Tegucigalpaon Monday, June 29. However, a combination ofactions by the players involved and a certain inertiaculminated in the coup d'état of June 28, whichforcibly overthrew the constitutional Government ofPresident José Manuel Zelaya Rosales.

That same day, the Permanent Council adoptedresolution 953, in which it condemned the coup d’étatand the arbitrary detention and expulsion from thecountry of the constitutional President. It demandedthe immediate, safe return of President Zelaya to hisconst i tut ional functions and declared that nogovernment arising from that interruption of thedemocratic order would be recognized. InvokingArticle 20 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, itinstructed the Secretary General to carry out allnecessary consultations with the member states of theOrganization to promote normalization of thedemocratic institutional order. In the same resolution,the Permanent Council convened a special session ofthe OAS General Assembly.

In plenary session, on July 1, 2009, the GeneralAssembly adopted resolution 1 (XXXVII-E/09), inwhich it instructed the Secretary General to undertake,together with representatives of various countries,diplomatic initiatives aimed at restoring democracyand the rule of law and the reinstatement of PresidentJose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, pursuant to Article 20 ofthe Inter-American Democratic Charter. That resolutionestablished that should those diplomatic initiativesprove unsuccessful within 72 hours, the SpecialSession of the General Assembly would forthwithinvoke Article 21 of the IADC to suspend Honduras’right to participate in the OAS.

Reject ion of that resolut ion by the de factogovernment and the exacerbation of the crisis led theGeneral Assembly to adopt AG/RES. 2 (XXXVII-E/09)on July 4, 2009. With 33 votes in favor andHonduras abstaining, that resolution suspended theright of Honduras from the exercise of its right toparticipate in the OAS. Simultaneously, the resolutiongave instructions for diplomatic initiatives to continuewith a view to restoring democracy and the rule oflaw in Honduras and reinstating President Zelaya.

Under this mandate, the OAS undertook a numberof diplomatic initiatives. They included, notably,support for moves made by the former President ofCosta Rica, Oscar Arias; the organization of twomissions of ministers of foreign affairs; mediation inthe "Guaymuras Dialogue"; and facilitation, in thiscase jointly with a delegation of the United States ofAmericas, of the negotiations for the “San José-Tegucigalpa Accord.”

In addition, the OAS helped overcome the obstaclespreventing Honduras' reincorporation into theOrganization. Once president Porfirio Lobo Sosa hadbeen elected, the Organization lent him institutionalsupport and technical advice for setting up a TruthCommission. In June 2010, the OAS GeneralAssembly instructed the Secretary General to form aHigh-Level Commission to analyze developments inthe political situation in Honduras and to submit arepor t with his recommendations. That repor tidentified a number of requisites, fulfillment of whichpaved the way for the ful l reincorporation ofHonduras in the OAS.

After somewhat bumpy legal proceedings, theSupreme Court of Justice finally, in May 2011,annulled lawsuits pending against former PresidentZelaya, paving the way for Zelaya's return toHonduras and, hence, for Honduras' return to theOAS. Initiatives by the governments of Colombia andVenezuela, culminating in the Cartagena Agreement,helped both these processes.

Once the recommendations of the High-LevelCommission coordinated by the Secretary Generaland the conditions stipulated in the CartagenaAgreement had been fulfilled, the member states meton June 1 and adopted resolution 1 at the fortiethspecial session of the General Assembly. That washow, in accordance with Article 22 of the IACD, the suspension was lifted and Honduras returned to the OAS.


Stre

ngth

enin

g an

d Pr

eser

ving

Dem

ocra

tic In

stitu

tions


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd E

lect

oral

Obs

erva

tion

Miss

ions

Dem

ocra

cy a

nd E

lect

oral

Obs

erva

tion

Miss

ions

Article 3 of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter recognizes as one of the essentialelements of representative democracy the

holding of periodic, free, and fair elections based onsecret bal lot ing and universal suffrage as anexpression of the sovereignty of the people. Electoralprocesses, construed as a set of successive orderlystages conducted in accordance with a pre-established legal and insti tutional framework,constitute the legitimate mechanisms from whichpower derives in a democratic regime. For agovernment to assert its democratic origins, it musthave resulted from elections; hence the symbolic,institutional, and operational significance of electoralprocesses.

Chapter V contains two general mandates for theOrganization of American States with regard toelections: first, that it provide advisory services forstrengthening and developing electoral institutions andprocesses, and, second, that it carry out electoralobservations missions at the request of the memberstates concerned. In practice, these two mandates areinterrelated because the recommendations made as aresult of the electoral observation work serve topinpoint the areas in which the OAS may usefully lendtechnical assistance to help perfect and strengthenelectoral processes and institutions in member statesthat request it. Thus, it is worth noting that more than60 percent of the technical cooperation missionscarried out between 2007 and 2011 originated inrepor ts prepared in connection with electoralobservation missions.

a. Cooperation for strengthening electoral institutions and processes

i. Training and Exchange ProgramsThe Depar tment of Electoral Cooperation andObservation (DECO) of the Secretariat for PoliticalAffairs (SPA) organizes activities for strengthening theinstitutional and human capacities of electoral bodiesin the Hemisphere. To that end, three Inter-AmericanElectoral Training Seminars were held in 2008, 2009,and 2010 for 121 officials from 31 member states inthe Hemisphere. The seminars stemmed from an OASinitiative developed jointly with FLACSO, Chile, the

Democracy and Electoral ObservationMissions

V

(2005 and 2010), El Salvador (2007), Bolivia(2009), and Paraguay (2010).

Biometric registrationIn 2009, at the request of the Government of Bolivia,the OAS observed the biometric registration processinitiated by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal of thatcountry in view of the general elections to be held inDecember of that year. DECO's technical cooperationfocused on three components: the logist ics,communications, and information technology aspects.

The successful culmination of that process resulted inan electoral register that is unique in the region in thatit meets high international standards. Bolivia'selectoral roll includes a digital signature, fingerprints,signature, and demographic data for each voter, suchas name, age, and address. The process also led toan increase in the number of registered voters from3,600,000 to 5, 200,000, thereby extending notonly the right to vote to more citizens but also thepossibility of exercising that right. The use of the new

register enhanced the credibility of the electoralprocesses conducted in December 2009 and April2010 in Bolivia.

Certification of the quality of electoralservices (ISO Standards)As of 2008, DECO achieved a qualitative leapforward in terms of electoral cooperation by includingin its technical assistance services the possibility ofproviding support for ISO 9001 quality certification.ISO standards help strengthen internal capacities andprocesses through a quality-centered approach.Certification fosters planning, the establishment oftargets and objectives, performance measurement,compliance with deadlines, and appropriate resourceallocation. Certification is one of the principal tools forachieving standardization of more efficient andtransparent procedures, which, in turn, strengthensand boosts the credibility of electoral institutions.


Federal Electoral Institute of Mexico, and IDEAInternacional. Each seminar consists of a week offace-to-face training sessions at the Federal ElectoralInstitute of Mexico, combining vertical instructionmethods with a horizontal dynamic in whichparticipants share experiences among themselves. Theidea is that participants will be able to pass on thelessons and experiences learned when they return totheir places of origin.

Since 2003, DECO has organized sevenMeetings of Electoral Authorities, attended bymore than 200 presidents and members of electoraltribunals. The purpose of these meetings is to promotean effective exchange of knowledge, experience, andbest practices with respect to electoral management inthe region and to promote horizontal cooperation.

Three on-line courses were also conducted onpreparations for elections, campaign financing, andvoter registration. Those educational and trainingexperiences were used to design a Degree inElectoral Processes in the Americas, the firstversion of which was launched on August 15, 2011,jointly with FLACSO, Chile and the Federal ElectoralInstitute of Mexico. For that initial version of theprogram, the Organization awarded scholarships to36 staff members of electoral bodies in Latin America,including 20 women.

ii. Horizontal Cooperation AgreementsHorizontal cooperation agreements enable the OASto facilitate the exchange among the region'selectoral institutions of knowledge, experience, andbest practices regarding a number of aspects of theelectoral process: quality control, electronic voting,electoral organization and management, and training.Between 2001 and 2011, six agreements of that kindwere concluded with the Federal Electoral Institute ofMexico (2009); the Electoral Tribunal of the Judiciaryof the Mexican Federation (2009); the State ElectoralCommission of Nuevo León, Mexico (2009 and

2011); the Electoral Supreme Court of Brazil (2010);the National Electoral Chamber of the ArgentineJudiciary (2010); and the United States ElectionAssistance Commission (2010).

iii. Electoral Technical CooperationAgreementsBetween 2001 and 2011, the OAS GeneralSecretariat signed two technical cooperationagreements with electoral bodies in the region with aview to addressing various areas and components ofthe electoral process so as to streamline and improveit, thereby helping to forge more robust electoralinstitutions. The first agreement of this type wasconcluded with the Electoral Supreme Court ofHonduras (2009) on electoral mapping and inclusionof persons with disabilities. The second was with theNational Electoral Council (CNE) if Ecuador (2011),on automated voting and vote counting in electoralprocesses.

In addition, within the framework of the electoraltechnical cooperation agreements, DECO focused onspecific items: five audits of electoral rolls; onebiometric registration; three quality certifications; andtwo advisory opinions on electoral legislation.

Audits of electoral rollsAn audit is an external and object ive reviewmechanism that culminates with the presentation of aseries of recommendations aimed at improving theelectoral rolls evaluated. Such an audit ascertains thedegree of reliability, transparency, screening and up-to-datedness of an electoral roll. That diagnosticassessment and the monitoring of implementation ofthe recommendations arising out of the audit arefundamental for holding any election, as they enhancethe credibility of electoral processes and institutions.

Between 2001 and 2011, the OAS conductedaudits of the electoral rolls of five countries, based onthe recommendations contained in the final reports ofthe Electoral Observation Missions in Guatemala


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd E

lect

oral

Obs

erva

tion

Miss

ions

activities in the course of an observation to thePermanent Council. This rendering of accountsdistinguishes OAS missions from those dispatched byother international bodies, since the latter are notobliged to publish their final report.

Since May 2005, the OAS has deployed 4,298observers (almost half of them women) from 31member states and 23 observer countries.

i. How Electoral Observation Missions haveevolved over time The role, structure, composition, and dynamics ofElectoral Observation Missions have all changed overtime, reflecting internal political shifts in the countriesof the region. The "first generation" of EOMs datesback to the 1960s, when they were carried out adhoc. A "second generation" of OAS missions startedwith the general elections in Nicaragua in 1990. Inthat second phase, the Missions became moreambitious in size and scope and included analysis ofvarious issues related to the quality of the processobserved.

One key event propelling the missions toward a"third generation" was the adoption of the Inter-American Democratic Charter in 2001. In thatdocument, the states devoted an entire chapter,Chapter V, to democracy and the ElectoralObservation Missions. The "third generation" of OASEOMs began when that Chapter was implemented.Since that milestone, the Missions are deemed to becomprehensive and long-term, and focused on thequality of electoral processes and institutions, insteadof restricting observation to just the day of theelections.

Another turning point in the "third generation" ofOAS Electoral Observation Missions came in 2006with the development by the Department of ElectoralCooperation and Observation (DECO) of a firstmethodology for systematizing the observation ofelectoral processes. As an outcome of that effort, theOAS published a document entitled Methods forElection Observation: A Manual for OAS ElectoralObservation Missions and, in 2008, the Manual forElectoral Observation Missions of the Organization ofAmerican States.

ii. Innovations in observationTo fur ther advance professional quali ty,comprehensiveness, and sophistication in electoralobservation, in 2010, DECO published its Observingthe Use of Electoral Technologies: A Manual for OASElectoral Observation Missions. DECO also crafted amethodology for observing the role of themedia during elections. Currently nearingcompletion is a Methodology for Incorporating aGender Perspective in Electoral Observation Missions.[See Chapter VI, Section c.: Equal and Ful lParticipation by Women in Political Structures]. Finally,one of the Department's most recent initiatives is thedevelopment of a methodology for comprehensiveobservation of the various facets of political-electoral financing systems in effect in thecountries of the region [See Chapter I, Section c.Strengthening Par t ies and Other Poli t icalOrganizations. Electoral Campaigns and FinancingSystems].


By the time this publication went to print, DECOhad provided assistance with implementation of theISO 9001 quality system in Costa Rica, Panama, andPeru.

Several electoral bodies in the region underscoredthe importance of having a specific internationalstandard for the electoral sphere. At that point, andgiven DECO's experience and prestige in qualitymanagement, a working group was formed to draftan ISO standard specifically for electoral processes.That standard will shortly be presented to ISOTechnical Committee 176.

Counseling on legislative reform of electoralprocesses Based on the recommendations made in the finalreports of Electoral Observation Missions, and at therequest of the member states, DECO providedtechnical advice on electoral reform on two occasions:once, to the Supreme Electoral Tribunal of Honduras(2007), and then to the Central Electoral Board of theDominican Republic (2010).

b. Electoral Observation

Since its first mission in 1962, the OAS has observed177 elections in 26 member states. In the 10 yearsthat have elapsed since the signing of the IADC in2001, 90 missions have been carried out, comparedto the 87 electoral processes observed in the 39 yearsbetween 1962 and 2001. Thus the IADC marks aturning point with respect to the importance ofimpartial, outside observation for guaranteeing free,fair, and transparent elections and legitimizingelectoral processes and outcomes. Throughout thoseyears, the Organization acquired experience andexper tise for observing all kinds of elections:presidential, legislative and constituent, parliamentary,regional, municipal, and primary, in addition toelections to the Andean Parliament, referendums, andplebiscites. Today, the OAS Electoral ObservationMissions encompass the whole of Latin America andthe Caribbean, guaranteeing and certifying thelegitimacy of electoral processes.

Article 24 of the IADC establishes the basicconditions for sending a mission, as well as theobligation that the missions present a report on their


Dem

ocra

cy a

nd E

lect

oral

Obs

erva

tion

Miss

ions


Prom

otin

g a

Dem

ocra

tic C

ultu

re

Prom

otin

g a

Dem

ocra

tic C

ultu

re

The last chapter of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter is devoted to “promotion of a democraticculture,” which involves expanding the notion of

democracy beyond the political system as such. In thissense, democracy is more than a set of institutions, norms,and procedures establishing the rules and channels foraccess to the principal positions in the State, the exerciseof state power, and the public decision-making process. Italso embraces society, which is composed of citizensenjoying and exercising specific political, civil, and socialrights and bound by obligations: a citizenry whoseattitudes, ways of life, and forms of behavior aregoverned not only by the rule of law but also by a seriesof values, symbols, beliefs, and customs with respect topower and politics that are compatible with democraticsystems. By acknowledging the relation between cultureand the institutional system, the Charter is a program notjust for strengthening and defending the democratic orderbut also for promoting cultural patterns in keeping with it.

Along those lines, Article 26 of the Charter emphasizesthe need to continue to carry out programs and activitiesdesigned to promote democratic principles and practicesand strengthen a democratic culture in the Hemisphere. Inthat effort, the contributions and participation of civilsociety organizations are increasingly important.

In Article 27, Chapter VI also outlines two moreprogram objectives: first to foster programs and activitiesdesigned to promote good governance, soundadministration, democratic values, and the strengtheningof political institutions and civil society organizations; and,second, to develop programs and activities for theeducation of children and youth as a means of ensuringthe continuance of democratic values.

Finally, promoting the full and equal participation ofwomen in the political structures of their countries isrecognized in Article 28 as a fundamental element in thepromotion and exercise of a democratic culture

a. Democratic principles and practices and the strengthening of a democratic culture (Article 26)

i. Inter-American Program for Education onDemocratic Values and PracticesPromoting the values, principles, and practices ofdemocracy is a long-term task requiring action by allsegments of society. In 2005, in order to promote thatongoing, multisector, long-haul endeavor, the OASestablished the Inter-American Program for Education onDemocratic Values and Practices, coordinated by theDepartment of Education and Culture of the ExecutiveSecretariat for Integral Development, in consultation withthe Secretariat for Political Affairs. The Program is ahemispheric platform bringing together ministries ofeducation, universities, civil society organizations,companies, and international organizations so thattogether they craft and strengthen educational strategiesand policies for developing civic skills.

Promoting a Democratic Culture

VI

b. Good governance, sound administration, democratic values, and the strengthening of political institutions and civil society organizations. Promotion of democratic values among children and youth. (Article 27)

Programs and activities to promote goodgovernance, sound administration,democratic values, and the strengtheningof political institutions

i. Program for Universal Civil Registry in theAmericas (PUICA)Since 2005, the OAS has been working on initiativesfor strengthening civil registries. In 2006, in response toa request by the Haitian Government, it played a keyrole in Haiti with the establishment of the NationalRegistry Office (Office National de l’Identification). Thework of this Office made it possible to register 3.5million Haitian adults and to issue national identitydocuments. These two tasks helped develop an electoralroll and extend the right to vote and take part in the2006 elections.

Based on the experience and successes achieved inHaiti, the Inter-American Program for Universal CivilRegistry in the Americas (PUICA) was launched in 2007.This Program seeks to expand and effectively implementthe universal right to civil registry of millions of peopleand, thereby, not only guarantee the protection ofhuman rights but also help ensure that people canexercise their rights as citizens and have easier access tothe services and benefits to which they, as citizens, areentitled. The program also furnishes states withinformation on their population that they need fordesigning and implementing development plans.

Through its activities, PUICA advises civil registryservices on rationalization and modernization, includingthe introduction of information technology and I.T.systems for expediting processes. In Guatemala, some5,216,728 I.D.s were checked, making it possible toclean up the National Civil Registry (RENAP). PUICAassistance led to the digitization of more than 9 millionhistorical entries and their storage in the Civil Registrydatabase of Paraguay.

The Program also promotes registration andawareness campaigns, especially among vulnerablegroups. This contributed to the registration of nearly fivemillion people; the training of over 800 indigenousleaders as motivators in registration campaigns inGuatemala; and to increased awareness in more than35,000 people, especially women, children, andindigenous persons.

Finally, PUICA fosters horizontal exchange of bestpractices among civil registry institutions. In that sense,the Latin American Council for Civil Registration,Identification, and Vital Statistics (CLARCIEV), which has21 members in Latin America and the Caribbean,functions as a platform promoting ongoing exchanges ofexperiences and facilitating knowledge transfer amongcivil registry institutions. Following recognition of theOAS work under PUICA, the Organization has operatedas the Executive Secretariat of CLARCIEV since 2007.

One of the major projects aimed at promoting andspreading the right to identity is being carried out inHaiti. Following the 2010 earthquake, PUICA helpedwith pre-registration of infants in the shelters in Port-au-Prince. That resulted in the civil registration of more than20,000 boys and girls. The National Registry office(ONI) received assistance for opening 141 permanentregistry offices all over Haiti, which made it possible toregister 4.8 million people.Today, 94 percent of theadult population is registered. A machine for printingI.D.s was also installed and that resulted in production of600,000 I.D.s in 18 months: in time for the presidentialand legislative elections in 2010. Birth certificates werealso digitized and systematized in a database that todayhouses more than 10 million certificates.

In 2010, PUICA produced its Manual on SoundPractices in Civil Registry and Diagnostic Assessment ofLegal Frameworks governing Civil Registry in theAmericas. Cooperation arrangements in the field of civilregistry were worked out with 15 countries in the region,as well as with various international cooperationagencies and the governments of Italy, China, andChile.

ii. Comprehensive Country Support Strategiesfor Effective Public Management As part of programs and activities designed to promotethe good governance and sound administration alludedto in Article 27 of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter, in 2010 the Department for Effective PublicManagement (DEPM) launched the ComprehensiveCountry Support Strategy Program. Through thisProgram, the OAS offers comprehensive technicalassistance to member states that request it in order tosupport effective and transparent public management


Under this Program, three on-line courses werestarted, which have trained more than 1,000 teachersand educational policy-makers in the Caribbean and inLatin America in the principles of the Inter-AmericanDemocratic Charter; in evaluation of civic educationpolicies; and in ways of making classroom work moredemocratic. In 2009, the Program supported ninetechnical cooperation missions in 12 countries tostrengthen civic education programs. A second round ofmissions began in August 2011.

Since 2007, the Program has also been encouragingacademic research in how best to educate citizens fordemocracy and harmonious coexistence. To that end, ithas produced six issues of the Inter-AmericanJournal of Education for Democracy and threeanalytical reports on the status of education for citizensin the region, as well as three videos and eight on-linebulletins containing materials for developing civic skillsthrough education.

ii. Strengthening Democratic Values andPractices for Sustaining and ConsolidatingDemocracy in Peru and in Latin America In 2006, with a view to taking the Democratic Charterbeyond political and diplomatic circles and expandingits reach and implementation among the citizens of theHemisphere, the OAS Office of Education and Cultureand the Permanent Mission of the United States to theOAS launched a program called “StrengtheningDemocratic Values and Practices for Sustainingand Consolidating Democracy in Peru and inLatin America.” In a second phase of this Program,starting in 2008 and carried out with the Ministry ofEducation in Peru and with financial support from theOAS Partnership for Development Fund (FEMCIDI), avirtual platform was put in place that provides trainingfor 400 teachers in education for democratic values andpractices.

iii. Lecture Series of the AmericasThe Lecture Series of the Americas began inSeptember 2004 pursuant to OAS Permanent Councilresolution CP/RES. 870, as part of an effort by themember states to enrich hemispheric discussion ofpriority issues on the inter-American agenda. So far, 45lectures have been delivered by political leaders,academics, and experts. More than 5,000 people haveattended the lectures since they began and many more,within and outside the region, heard them via the Web

iv. Civil Society ContributionsEver since the adoption of the Inter-American DemocraticCharter, the OAS encouraged the participation ofrepresentatives of civil society organizations in differentorgans and activities of the OAS, including the GeneralAssembly, the Permanent Council, ministerial meetings,and specialized conferences, as well as in the Summitsof the Americas. Article 6 of the IADC states that “[i]t isthe right and responsibility of all citizens to participate indecisions relating to their own development." (...)Promoting and fostering diverse forms of participationstrengthens democracy.” Furthermore, Article 26establishes that the OAS will take into account thecontributions of civil society organizations (CSOs)working in programs and activities designed to promotedemocratic principles and practices and strengthen ademocratic culture in the Americas.

Over the past 10 years, major progress has beenachieved in the region as a result of cooperationbetween civil society and the OAS member states. Thatcooperation facilitated the adoption of a hemisphericagenda in the framework of the Summits of the Americasprocess and within the Organization. In that sameperiod, civil society organizations submitted 2,250recommendations to the member states on topicsaddressed in the Democratic Charter, including:democratic governance, transparency, education,employment generation, sustainable development andthe environment, human rights, electoral cooperation,and gender equity.

Currently, 361 organizations are registered in theOAS roster of civil society organization and take part inthe day-to-day work of the Organization. In addition,more than 2,000 nongovernmental organizations work,directly or indirectly, with the political bodies andtechnical areas of the Organization. Of them, over 500signed cooperation agreements, mainly to do withsustainable development, strengthening of democracy,and education.

Civil society participation in the OAS hasstrengthened the institutional capacity ofnongovernmental organizations inasmuch as they gainmore exposure and increase their impact andprominence within and beyond the region. Thatparticipation also facilitated the establishment of nofewer than 40 international CSO networks that operateinside the OAS on issues relating to democracy; anti-corruption and transparency; trafficking in persons;promotion of the rights of Afro-descendant communities;indigenous communities; sexual orientation and genderidentity; and human rights defenders.

These opportunities for interaction place the OAS atthe vanguard of the inter-American and United Nationssystem with regard to citizen participation, because therepresentatives of the CSOs do not just attend meetingsas observers; they also influence the negotiation ofresolutions and participate in their implementation andmonitoring.


Prom

otin

g a

Dem

ocra

tic C

ultu

re

workings of the OAS, and afford them an opportunity togain practical experience in multilateral diplomacy,within the framework of the principles and values setforth in the IADC.

The first MOAS was held in Washington, D.C., in1980, and spread, as of 2000, to countries in theregion that organized national Models. That enabledmore than 8,000 young people in the Hemisphere toparticipate.

c. Full and equal participation of women in political structures (Article 28).

In its last Article, the Inter-American Democratic Chartercommits the OAS member states to promoting "... the fulland equal participation of women in the politicalstructures of their countries as a fundamental element inthe promotion and exercise of a democratic culture." Theinclusion of Article 28 may be construed as recognitionof the disparity that exists in the extent and quality ofparticipation, representation, and leadership betweenmen and women in the democratic systems of the regionand of the need to close that gap. At the hemisphericlevel, the discussion of democracy lacks any vision ofwomen's citizenship and its implications for democracy.Nor does it include any thoughts as to the contributionsmade by feminist movements or the proactive partplayed by women in the recovery and expansion ofdemocracy, in the forging of a democratic citizenry, andin the politicization of the domestic sphere.

Responding to that dearth of reflection, the Inter-American Commission of Women (CIM), together withUN Women, IDEA Internacional, the Ibero-AmericanGeneral Secretariat (SEGIB), and the United NationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP) began an innovativework plan to contribute to the hemispheric debate onwomen by including in it a female perspective andwomen's experience and insight. The core objective ofthat inter-agency synergy is to ensure that priority isattached to the participation, representation, andleadership of women in the region's democraticprocesses.

This dialogue commenced officially with the FirstHemispheric Forum on Women's Leadershipfor a Citizens’ Democracy, held in Washington,D.C., on April 4 to 6, 2011. That Forum triggered anexchange of views among women leaders throughoutthe region, which led to the publication of Lademocracia de ciudadanía: visiones y debates desde

los derechos de las mujeres de las Américas [A Citizens'Democracy: Insights and Debates based on the Rights ofthe Women of the Americas] That publication providesguidelines for constructing a benchmark analyticalframework on women's rights in a citizens’ democracy.

Apart from turning the Hemispheric Forum into asformal annual event, another concrete outcome of themeeting was the establishment of a Working Groupon a Citizens' Democracy from a Women'sPoint of View.

The under-representation of women in the leadershipof movements, parties, and institutions is a challenge stillpending for democracies in the region. To counter thatdefect, the CIM has launched several initiatives. In2010, it completed a study on the implementation ofquota laws in the countries of the Andean region.Marking publication of that study, entitled Leyes decuota: Estado del arte, buenas prácticas y desafíospendientes en la región Andina [Quota Laws: State ofthe art, best practices, and challenges still pending in theAndean region], the CIM brought together members ofparliament, representatives of electoral institutions andother governmental bodies, academics, andrepresentatives of international organizations to identifyspecific mechanisms for supporting women's politicalrepresentation. The meeting culminated in the adoptionof the "Declaration of Lima for a GenderEquitable Democracy."

In 2010, the CIM began the "Capacity-Buildingfor Leadership and for Influencing PublicPolicies for Gender Equality" project. This projectseeks to strengthen the capacity of professionals ingovernmental and nongovernmental organizations forleadership in gender equality management in publicpolicy formulation processes in the member states. Tothat end, an initial training course was conducted inOctober 2010, while an online version was scheduledfor launching in 2011 with a view to expandingoutreach.

In order to eliminate under-representation of women ina number of political spheres, the Department ofElectoral Cooperation and Observation (DECO) of theSecretariat for Political Affairs is working on building agender perspective into electoral observationmethodology. The mainstreaming of that perspectivewill highlight the existence of barriers to the full andequal participation of women in the countries of theregion, within the specific context of an observedelectoral process. That information will be useful formaking recommendations to governments and topolitical parties, as well as for developing new technicalcooperation programs aimed at increasing women'sparticipation.


based on their National Development Plan. Programs ofthis kind are currently under way in Bolivia, Paraguay,and El Salvador. In 2012, three more programs arescheduled to come on stream in the Caribbean, startingwith one in Belize.

iii. Online Campus of the Department forEffective Public ManagementSince 2003, the Online Campus has been offering aportfolio of 21 online courses on public management,including: e-government; land registry; the legislature;transparency and access to public information;decentralization and local governments. So far, morethan 5,000 participants in 28 member states havereceived training.

iv. Support for the Legislative Branch The Democratic Charter may be regarded as amanifesto for representative democracy, which itestablishes as the one form of government shared by allthe peoples of the Americas. In a democratic politicalsystem with the characteristics stipulated in the Charter,the Legislature is one of the bodies, par excellence, inwhich citizen representation materializes. At the sametime, Article 27 of the IADC calls for programs andactivities that will strengthen political institutions. Thatstrengthening is, in turn, vital for consolidating one of theessential components of representative democracy listedin Article 3 of the Democratic Charter: the separation ofpowers and independence of the branches ofgovernment. The effective exercise of that component isessential for a republican institutional system. Democracyand a republican system are mutually reinforcing. TheRepublic is one of the central pillars allowing democracyto thrive and be consolidated. And for republicaninstitutions to be an intrinsic part of democracy there hasto be a Legislative Branch with its own independentpolitical, technical, and financial status.

Shortly after adoption of the Inter-AmericanDemocratic Charter (IADC) and inspired by it, the OASestablished its Program to Support the Strengthening ofLegislative Institutions (PAFIL). Over the 10 years thathave elapsed since then, PAFIL became what is nowknown as the Support to Legislative InstitutionsSection in the Department for Effective PublicManagement of the OAS Secretariat for Political Affairs.Through that Section, the OAS works with numerousnational and local legislatures and with regionalParliaments to promote political dialogue; education andtraining for officials; the strengthening andmodernization of legislative management; and inter-parliamentary cooperation.

Programs and activities for the educationof children and youth as a means ofensuring the continuance of democraticvalues

i. Inter-American Public and PoliticalLeadership Network (RIALLP) Article 27 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter alsounderscores the importance of developing programs andactivities for the education of children and youth as ameans of ensuring the continuance of democratic values,including liberty and social justice. This approach,supported by the IADC, is geared to consolidatingcertain practices and principles in emerging generationsthat are fundamental for generating a democratic cultureconcomitant to and compatible with the democraticinstitutional order promoted and championed by theOrganization. That is why, specifically pursuant to theIADC mandate, the OAS has conducted more than 50courses in the past 10 years on democratic institutions,values, and practices for over 2,000 young leaders inall the Latin American and Caribbean countries.

Those courses generated a critical mass of formerpupils and institutions making up the Inter-AmericanPublic and Political Leadership Network (RIALLP). TheNetwork is a vir tual forum for maintaining andbroadening relations, continuing dialogue amongparticipants, and promoting democratic values,principles, and practices.

ii. Emerging Political Leaders (EPL)In 2010, the Secretariat for Political Affairs launched itsEmerging Political Leaders in the Americas (EPLA) projectto create a forum for dialogue among young politiciansfrom all over the Hemisphere who are likely to becomeprominent in their parties and in the national politics oftheir respective countries. That forum also seeks toestablish ongoing exchanges between the organizationand emerging leaders, with two goals in mind: on theone hand, to publicize what the OAS does to a strategicaudience and, on the other, to bring new opinions andideas to bear on institutional initiatives. So far, two (2)subregional meetings have taken place, with theparticipation of 33 politicians.

iii. Model General Assembly of the OAS (MOAS)The Model is an OAS General Assembly simulationprogram through which students from all the countries inthe Americas pretend to be representatives of memberstates and recreate negotiation processes and quests forpoints of consensus aimed at drafting resolutions onpertinent issues on the inter-American agenda. It isdesigned to promote democratic values among the youthof the Hemisphere, familiarize them with the work and


Prom

otin

g a

Dem

ocra

tic C

ultu

re


Road

Map

As regards the first “pillar” of the IADC, mention hasbeen made in several forums of the possibility of devisinga peer review instrument to evaluate and provide anobjective, periodic evaluation of the status of democra-cies in the Hemisphere based on the different componentsand functions listed in the IADC. Activating the mecha-nism would be voluntary for the countries that decide tosubmit to the evaluation process. This monitoring andevaluation process has at least four advantages:

First, by linking the mechanism directly to the contentsof the IADC, it would dispel suspicions of interventionassociated with an attempt to “evaluate democracy” ingeneral.

Second, it would facilitate identification of shortcom-ings and of elements and areas that need strengthening.

Third, it would favor international and horizontal coop-eration, rather than imposition, denunciation, or sanc-tions, as the way to address the shortcomings detected,correct mistakes, and close gaps.

Fourth, it would allow civil society participation, likethat already taking place in the Organization on mattersrelating to human rights, gender, indigenous peoples,Afro-descendants, and efforts to combat corruption.

With regard to the second pillar of the IADC, namelythe defense of democracy, a number of proposals havebeen put forward to improve implementation of ChapterIV by striking a balance between collective defenseactions and the principle of nonintervention and non-inter-ference. These proposals include:

First, extending the possibility of invoking the IADC toother branches of government, and not just the Executive,particularly with respect to the possibility of invokingsome articles of Chapter IV. This could be done by adopt-ing a broad definition of government and clearly estab-lishing the appropriate channels for access to IADCoptions, so as to avoid institutional disorder. In intergov-ernmental organizations, like the OAS, states are repre-sented by ambassadors, appointed by presidents andprime ministers.

Second, explicitly and more precisely defining what sit-uations constitute serious alterations of the constitutionaland institutional order. This could be attained by meansof a formal political consensus reflected in a GeneralAssembly resolution. The forging of that consensus coulddraw on several contributions, such as those of the Inter-American Juridical Committee and outside bodies.

Third, promoting a gradual approach in the modusoperandi of the General Secretariat and the PermanentCouncil, particularly since the OAS is a multilateralorganization operating on the basis of areas of consen-sus built among 34 active member states. In the end,what is needed is a range of tools, processes, and initia-tives compatible with the preventive and crisis-solving roleof the Organization when it comes to implementingChapter IV of the Democratic Charter. In this line ofthought it is essential to grant the Secretary General morepolitical room for maneuver and flexibility, as well as to

strengthen his capacity to offer assistance, in a preventivecapacity, to member states in averting emerging political-institutional crises. Those capacities would include, interalia, monitoring, technical and analytical support,deployment of special representatives or missions, andactivating negotiation and dialogue processes with aview to reaching political agreements, in connection withwhich he would report to the Permanent Council on initia-tives, measures, and outcomes achieved.

Consolidating the ongoing relevance of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and enhancing its effectiveimplementation are essential for the credibility of theOrganization of American States, which today is ques-tioned from at least two standpoints: at one extreme, bythose nostalgic for anachronistic practices that violateinternational law; at the other, those who would like tocondemn the Organization to irrelevance. In the middleis a large majority advocating an OAS attuned to achanging world and not moored in the past; that supportsand promotes a comprehensive, integral vision of democ-racy, making the most of the Organization’s multilateralresources and honoring the collective commitment themember states have undertaken but without interventionsor interferences contrary to the principles of the Inter-American System: an OAS that helps the governments inthe region to transform the right to democracy into a dailyreality for the citizens of the Americas.

—Víctor Rico FrontauraSecretary for Political Affairs

The tenth anniversary of the Inter-American Democratic Charter affordsa suitable opportunity to renew and

deepen the commitment of theOrganization of American States (OAS) tothe promotion and defense of democracy.

In these last ten years, the OAS hasdemonstrated its capacity to avoid alter-ations and interruptions of the constitution-al and institutional order and it has beeneffective in solving the political crises itwas called upon to address. Likewise, theexperience and expertise acquired by theOAS with electoral observation havebecome a rubber stamp for testifying totransparent and free elections.Furthermore, the cooperation agreementsbetween the OAS General Secretariat andthe member states in a number of fields(electoral, public administration, and soon) have helped to strengthen the demo-cratic institutional order. Along those samelines, using the multilateral forum andbased on horizontal cooperation,progress has also been made in the fightagainst corruption. Finally, with respect tothe consolidation of democracy, no onecan question the prestige and achieve-ments of the IACHR in the promotion anddefense of human rights.

However, it is also necessary toacknowledge that in that same lapse oftime the region underwent significantchange. The progress made with povertyreduction, greater inclusion, and citizenparticipation in the forging of democracyis undeniable. Those who were onceexcluded are today, in several countries,leaders in their societies. As a result of thatprogress, support for democracyincreased. Nevertheless, in some cases,the democratic institutional order and therule of law were debilitated, while inequal-ity is still rampant all over the region.

At the same time, the regional consen-sus that made it possible for member statesto adopt the IADC in 2001 apparently nolonger exists. Disagreement is voiced, onthe one hand, regarding limits to the exer-

cise of power and about what is considered to be demo-cratic exercise of power and, on the other, regarding therole of the Organization in the collective defense ofdemocracy. The permanent tension generated by diverg-ing views on these two aspects undoubtedly impairsimplementation of the Charter’s provisions and, conse-quently, the ability of the Organization to contribute to thedefense and consolidation of democracy in the region.

Despite the achievements and progress, there is a longroad still ahead in this interminable, ongoing process ofconsolidation, especially given the multiple challengesfacing democracies in the Hemisphere. That is why it isessential to direct national and multilateral efforts towardstrengthening the pillars on which the Democratic Charteris built, interpreting the Charter as, in the SecretaryGeneral’s words, “the Program of the DemocraticRepublic.” Hence the importance of the separation andbalance of powers, the democratic rule of law, an inde-pendent judiciary; restrictions on the exercise of power,the credibility of political parties and organizations, thecurrent effectiveness and activation of vertical controlmechanisms, and accountability.

Furthermore, in order to guarantee the sustainability ofdemocracy, it is necessary to focus on strengthening theState as such and on the effectiveness of public adminis-tration. Given the ongoing prevalence of structural prob-lems, including insecurity, poverty, inequality, and citi-zens’ demands for greater opportunities, democraciesand their governments are duty-bound to provideanswers. This aspect of democracy, namely the purposeof the democratic exercise of power and the outcomes ofthat exercise, affects the level of credibility, support for,and satisfaction with democracy. It is when people per-ceive a change for the better in their lives and the oppor-tunities open to them abound that democracy takes onmeaning and relevance and citizenship becomes not reg-ulatory but real.

The Inter-American Democratic Charter provides anideal framework for the OAS to use its multilateral statusand cooperation to assist member states in their individ-ual and regional initiatives to promote and consolidatethe essential components of representative democracyand the fundamental components of the democratic exer-cise of power. In addition, the fact that an inter-Americaninstrument such as the Democratic Charter is in forceincreases the Organization’s ability to defend the continu-ity of those elements and components in the face ofthreats that could place the democratic political-institution-al process or the legitimate exercise of power at risk.

Toward Consolidation of the CollectiveCommitment to Democracy

Road

Map

Spec

ial T

hank

sInter-American Commission of Women:Hilary Anderson, María Celina Conte, Belkys Mones

Department of Electoral Cooperation and Observation: Pablo Gutiérrez, Betilde Muñoz, María Teresa Mellenkamp, Marcela Garzón,Rebeca Omaña, Rafael D’Armas, Rosa Serpa, Sara Mía Noguera, AlejandroUrizal, Brenda Santamaría

Department of Democratic Sustainability and Special Missions: Duarte Valente, Micaela Martinet, Rodrigo Zubieta

Department for Effective Public Management: Pablo Zúñiga, Milagros Haro, Raúl Esparza, Miguel A. Porrúa, Moisés Benamor, Gertrudis Hernández, Tânia Blackburn, Gonzalo Neira,Carmen Apaza

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Maria Isabel Rivero, Fanny Gómez, Catalina Botero, Michael Camilleri

Executive Secretariat for Integral Development: Jorge Saggiante, Claudia De Windt, María Moreno, Evelyn Jacir, IsabelZuluaga, Mónica Gómez, Isis Márquez, Kristjan Sigurdson, Andrea Lobato,Adriana Bonilla

Department of International Affairs:Irene Klinger, Jorge Sanín, Victoria Abalo

Department of International Law: Dante Negro, Luis Toro, Francisco Montero

Department of Legal Cooperation: Jorge García González, Laura Martínez

Trust for the Americas:Claudia González, Silvina Acosta


Cre

dits

Secretary General: José Miguel Insulza

Assistant Secretary General:Albert R. Ramdin

Secretary for Political Affairs:Víctor Rico Frontaura

Coordination:Karen BozicovichAmparo Trujillo

Design:Christopher ShellSebastián Vicente

Translation:Jonathan Cavanagh

OAS Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Tenth anniversary of the Inter-American Democratic Charter : A hemisphericcommitment to democracy.

p. ; cm. (OAS official records ; OEA/Ser.D/XXSG/SAP/III.21)ISBN 978-0-8270-5681-71. Inter-American Democratic Charter (2001). 2. Democracy--America. 3.Political rights--America.4. Human rights--America. 5. Pan-Americanism. I. Series.

OEA/Ser.D/XX SG/SAP/III.21

Inter-American Democratic Charter - OAS - Organization of American

Documents