Colombia

Forum with Civil Society Organizations - VI Summit of the Americas

For more information click here

Wed, 04/11/2012 - 09:00 - Thu, 04/12/2012 - 17:00
VI Summit of the Americas
Cartagena

CCAJAR and CEJIL issue a press release on the Mapiripán Massacre hearing at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Bogotá D.C., and Washington D.C., November 24, 2011– Regarding the hearing on compliance with the Judgment of the Mapiripán Massacre case, held on Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, CEJIL and CCAJAR express their satisfaction that the Court reaffirmed that the prime interest is the protection of the victims of severe human rights violations.

Thu, 11/24/2011

Bogotá D.C., and Washington D.C., November 24th, 2011– Regarding the hearing on compliance with the Judgment of the Mapiripán Massacre case, held on Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, CEJIL and CCAJAR express their satisfaction that the Court reaffirmed that the prime interest is the protection of the victims of severe  human rights violations.

In its 2005 judgment the Court was able to identify 20 victims of the massacre by name. At the same time, it stated that there were approximately 49 victims and that the State had the duty to continue investigating the facts in order to identify the remaining victims.

During the compliance hearing, it was clear that the victims named in the judgment had been confirmed by the State on several occasions throughout the international proceedings. An additional victim was identified by the State during the process of monitoring compliance. However, today, the Colombian State is questioning some of these recognized victims in clear contradiction with its previous submissions to the Court. During this compliance hearing, it was also evident that the Colombian State has been negligent in its duty to individually identify the victims of this massacre, as well as to establish the actual number of murdered and forcibly disappeared victims.

The information presented by the State before the Court is based in the investigations of the Justice and Peace Unit of the Prosecutor’s Office, which, without denying the existence of the Mapiripán Massacre itself, are intended to reduce its magnitude, by referring to the existence of only 12 victims.

In contradiction to this, a report by the Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Unit of the Prosecutor’s Office issued on April 2011 identifies 77 possible victims of the Massacre.

At the hearing before the Court, the State asked for the review of the judgment, without presenting evidence of its affirmations or clarifying the terms of its request. Fourteen years and four months after the Mapiripán Massacre, and six years after the Inter- American Court´s  judgment was issued the Colombian State asked for 3 more months to present the evidence that would support its current request.

We welcome the fact that the Colombian State is resorting to the appropriate channels for debate, such as the procedure for monitoring compliance with a judgment, and not to de facto actions such as discussing the case in the media or presenting inaccurate information.

It will be the Inter-American Court, in an autonomous manner, and after the corresponding legal debate, that will issue the appropriate resolution which will protect the truth based on the real facts of the case, as well as the victims of the Mapiripán Massacre. The decisions of the Court are final and cannot be questioned or appealed.

Center for Justice and International Law issues statement on the Mapiripán v. Colombia case

Washington D.C., November 1, 2011 – As is public knowledge, Mariela Contreras, a witness in the Mapiripán v. Colombia case decided by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2005, has allegedly recently retracted the statements she gave in Colombian proceedings in 2002 and before the Inter-American Court in 2005. This has generated a vigorous debate in Colombia over the magnitude of the crimes that were committed, the penalties given to those responsible, and the duties of both the justice administration, as well as the lawyers representing the accusers.

Tue, 11/01/2011

Washington D.C., November 1, 2011 – As is public knowledge, Mariela Contreras, a witness in the Mapiripán v. Colombia case decided by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2005, has allegedly recently retracted the statements she gave in Colombian proceedings in 2002 and before the Inter-American Court in 2005. This has generated a vigorous debate in Colombia over the magnitude of the crimes that were committed, the penalties given to those responsible, and the duties of both the justice administration, as well as the lawyers representing the accusers.

First, it is essential to clarify that there is no doubt in either the domestic or international arena as to the occurrence of the massacre. Nor is there any doubt as to the shared role of the AUC and members of security forces in events, which were widely reported in the press and for which both the state and the paramilitaries themselves have recognized their responsibility. Second, CEJIL shares the concern of the justice administration, our colleagues from the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers’ Collective (CCAJAR), the government, and Colombian society when faced with the possibility that this witness may have manipulated the process at the national and international level with false declarations, and we are confident that this situation will be properly investigated and clarified.
 
On the other hand, it should be emphasized that CEJIL and CCAJAR began representing Mariela Contreras in the international proceedings in 2003, four years after the initial petition in the Mapiripán case was presented before the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, and one year after her declaration to the Attorney General of Colombia.
 
Moreover, her statement was entirely consistent with the statements of her children, the forensic evidence, evidence of relevant documents, the testimony of the authorities, among them judge Novoa Cortes, as well as with the statements of expert witnesses, victims and their family members. When litigating a case, the evidence is fundamentally based on the entire body of evidence that exists at the internal level and on all the information provided by the State. Additionally, it should be noted that the Colombian state itself, represented by the Executive authority, repeatedly included Mrs. Contreras among the family members of the victims of the massacre during the international proceedings and assumed international responsibility for the crimes committed.
 
The uncertainty over the number of victims of the Mapiripán massacre is not a new issue, but rather was clearly identified during international litigation. Indeed, the difficulty in reaching a precise number of victims was identified by the Inter-American Court in their 2005 judgment as one of the shortcomings of the state’s investigation. In that judgment, the Court ordered the state to conduct all due diligence necessary to individualize and identify each executed and disappeared victim and their family members within a reasonable amount of time. That same Court reaffirmed that, precisely because of the way in which the massacre was planned and executed, it was possible that, in exceptional cases, the whereabouts of persons previously taken for dead could be established in the course of a criminal investigation.
 
In light of this information, CEJIL and the other human rights organizations connected to this case remain committed to establishing the truth, bringing those responsible to justice and determining the reparations owed to the victims.
 
Contact in Washington Milli Legrain mlegrain@cejil.org Tel (1) 202 319 3000
 

Colombian Human Rights Defenders Continue to Endure Threats, Attacks, Harassment and Illegal Surveillance under Santos Government

On May 10, U.S. citizen Kimberly Ann Stanton, wife of human rights lawyer Rafael Barrios of the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers’ Collective (CCAJAR), and former Washington Office on Latin America deputy director received in her cell phone voice mail a recording of a private conversation that she had had with Rafael Barrios a few days previously, while they were in the car provided for Mr. Barrios’ protection by the Colombian government’s protection program. The voice mail was preceded by numerous calls to her cell phone from a cell phone in Turbo, Antioquia.  Upon receiving the complaint, the Attorney General’s office examined the car and found a microphone in it.

 

Mon, 05/23/2011

Despite welcome promises on human rights improvements by the Santos Administration that took office in August 2010, Colombia’s human rights defenders continue to endure threats, attacks, break-ins of their homes and offices, and illegal surveillance. Two recent incidents involving leading human rights defenders illustrate how dangerous the situation has become.

On May 10, U.S. citizen Kimberly Ann Stanton, wife of human rights lawyer Rafael Barrios of the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers’ Collective (CCAJAR), and former Washington Office on Latin America deputy director received in her cell phone voice mail a recording of a private conversation that she had had with Rafael Barrios a few days previously, while they were in the car provided for Mr. Barrios’ protection by the Colombian government’s protection program. The voice mail was preceded by numerous calls to her cell phone from a cell phone in Turbo, Antioquia.  Upon receiving the complaint, the Attorney General’s office examined the car and found a microphone in it.

On April 7, CCAJAR had returned some of the protection measures provided by the government, those administered by the intelligence agency DAS, because “we have learned that the protection program for CCAJAR was being used against us,” according to Mr. Barrios.   However, CCAJAR had kept the protection scheme provided for by the Ministry of Justice, including the car that Mr. Barrios was using for his protection, in which the microphone was subsequently found.

This event takes place in a very tense context due to the current work that CCAJAR is undertaking. On one hand, CCAJAR’s attorneys are representing victims before national courts in the case against DAS agents for illegal surveillance on civilians, including journalists, human rights defenders, and opposition leaders. On the other hand, CCAJAR also represents victims of human rights violations committed by high- ranking military officials. In this regard, just a few weeks ago, a sentence was issued convicting General Arias Cabrales to 35 years in prison for the forced disappearance of 11 people, all represented by CCAJAR, in the Palace of Justice case.

This same week the Bogotá home of prominent human right defender, Danilo Rueda, of the Inter-Church Commission of Justice and Peace (CIJP) was broken into, computer tampered with and two USBs stolen. The USBs contained sensitive information relating to the Operation Genesis case, a joint military and paramilitary operation carried out in the Chocó in 1996-7 whose Afro-descendant victims are represented by CIJP in a legal suit against retired General Rito Alejo del Rio.

Mr. Rueda and other CIJP staff are victims of the DAS illegal surveillance intelligence case. The break in is the latest of a series of troubling security incidents.

In April, CIJP staff was riding in Bogotá in armored cars provided by the government’s protection program when they were followed suspicious individuals. The trailing car proceeded to follow Mr. Rueda to his home. The car containing four men stopped in front of Mr. Rueda’s apartment, and one of the men rang his bell. When no one responded they left. On April 1, Gisela Cañas, a lawyer with CIJP, received a text message with the following death threat: “Listen Gisela bloody bitch…we know where you are and we will kill you for defending foolish things, we give you 48 hours to leave the country.”

Justice and Peace, a religious organization, provides legal and physical accompaniment to Afro-Colombian, indigenous and campesino and displaced communities and victims in various conflictive regions of Colombia including the Chocó, Valle del Cauca, Cauca, Sucre and Putumayo. The break-in at Mr. Rueda’s home and a recent break in at Justice and Peace’s Curvaradó office are indicative that Mr. Rueda and staff are at very high risk of harm.

We join these human rights defenders and their organizations in calling on the Colombian government to: promptly investigate and prosecute these threats, break-ins, and illegal surveillance; improve protection measures as requested by the groups affected; and put an end, for once and for all, to all illegal surveillance. The Santos Administration must not only embrace the language of human rights, but also take effective action to guarantee the legitimate work of human rights defenders, essential for freedom of expression and a thriving democratic society. We join U.S. policymakers in welcoming the improved tone that Mr. Santos has brought to human rights issues, but the U.S government should insist upon concrete, demonstrable results in the investigation and prosecution of these cases, the strengthening of protection programs, and the dismantling of illegal surveillance schemes.

For more information, contact:

Gimena Sánchez-Garzoli, Washington Office on Latin America, (202) 546-7070, cell (202) 489-1702, gsanchez@wola.org

Lisa Haugaard, Latin America Working Group, lisah@lawg.org

Viviana Krsticevic, Center for Justice and International Law, vkrsticevic@cejil.org

Abigail Poe, Center for International Policy, abigail@ciponline.org

Colombia Should be Held Liable for Violating Human Rights in the Case of Missing Persons During the Palace of Justice Siege in Colombia

Years waiting for justice

Audiencia ante la CIDH en el caso de los desaparecidos del Palacio de Justicia

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has sufficient evidence to declare the international responsibility of Colombia for the violation of human rights in the operation held by the army and the police to regain control of the Palace of Justice on November 6, 1985.

Mon, 03/22/2010

Washington D.C. March 22, 2010

Audiencia ante la CIDH en el caso de los desaparecidos del Palacio de Justicia

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has sufficient evidence to declare the international responsibility of Colombia for the violation of human rights in the operation held by the army and the police to regain control of the Palace of Justice on November 6, 1985.

This was proved today at a hearing before the IACHR by the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), the Colectivo de Abogados "José Alvear Restrepo" (CAJAR), and the Commission for Justice and Peace (CIJP).

For petitioning organizations , the State of Colombia is responsible for the disappearance of 12 people, the torture of three, and the disappearance and extrajudicial execution of a Judge of the Supreme Court.

The incident occurred in an operation by the police and army to retake the Palace of Justice, which had been violently occupied by the guerrilla group Movimiento 19 de Abril (M-19), with over 300 people inside. The operation, in which force was used excessively and disproportionately, causing over 100 deaths.

Liliana Avila from CIJP said that “nearly a quarter century after, the case of the Palace of Justice remains in total impunity. The government has not not adequately investigated the enforced disappearances, the torture, nor the extrajudicial killing of the magistrate judge".

The organizations highlighted the findings of the Truth Commission on the facts of the Palace of Justice, prepared by the Supreme Court, which issued its final report in December, 2009.

According to the Truth Commission, there is no doubt that the missing persons (cafeteria employees and occasional visitors) entered the Palace of Justice the day of the incident, survived the operation for "retaking", were arrested by agents of the State, designated as “special hostages" with "arbitrary and superficial criteria” and forcibly disappeared. Until this date, there is no knowledge of their whereabouts.

Also demonstrated by the Truth Commission, torture and cruel degrading treatment suffered by a student, a lawyer, and an employee of the state enterprises of Bogota, as well as the extrajudicial killing of Judge Carlos Horacio Urán, who left the court alive with non-fatal injuries and was executed by government agents.

The first complaint about the case before the IACHR was released in 1990, but until now there has been no response from the State. For the petitioning organizations, such conduct of the State "is consistent with its silence on internal level in reference to the requests for truth and justice by victims and their families."

"Faced with allegations of procedure of the state, we want to draw the attention to the procedural conduct of the State which is absolutely made upon bad faith" said Viviana Krsticevic, executive director of CEJIL.

For Krsticevic, in 19 years of processing the case before the IACHR, the State has only submitted 19 pages of "precarious and insufficient" information.

Rafael Barrios, CAJAR lawyer, criticized that the State has not referred to the report of the Truth Commission, which confirmed the allegations of the petitioners, and recalled that the first serious research began 20 years after the fact, but so far not a single sentence has been given. Barrios has denied that 14 members of the military are in trial and added that six military defendants are in complete liberty because the State failed to beat the deadlines for processing.

The petitioning organizations asked the IACHR to "help break the pact of silence" by issuing a substantive report to establish the international responsibility of the Colombian state.

 

Press Contact: Mauricio Herrera. Director of Communications.

(202) 319-3000, (202) 445-46-76. mherrera@cejil.org.

 

The Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) is an advocacy of human rights in the Americas. CEJIL's main objective is to ensure full implementation of international human rights standards in the Member States of the Organization of American States (OAS), through the effective use of the Inter-american human rights system and other international protection mechanisms. CEJIL is a nongovernmental nonprofit with consultative status at the OAS, the Organization of the United Nations (UN) and observer status with the African Commission on Human Rights.

 

The Rochela Massacre / Colombia

Homenaje a víctimas de la masacre de La Rochela

In the community of La Rochela, in January 1989, a paramilitary group kidnapped a 15-person commission of judicial officials who were investigating the civic and military responsibilities involved in various massacres committed in the Magdalena Medio zone. The paramilitaries shot at the group, killing 12 and injuring the other three.

CEJIL and the Collective of Attorneys José Alvear Restrepo brought the case before the Inter-American Human Rights Commission (CIDH) and later represented the victims and their families before the Inter-American Human Rights Court.

In May 2007, the Inter-American Court made its decision on the case, in which it considered Colombia responsible for the violation of the human rights to life, personal integrity, liberty, and the judicial guarantees of the 15 victims and their families. It also ordered the Colombian government to investigate the massacre in a diligent manner, including the possibility that high government officials knew, or should have known, about the paramilitaries’ actions. The court established that, between 1979 and 1991, there was an average of approximately 25 judges and lawyers that were assassinated or suffered assassination attempts annually.

The court analyzed the legal setting regarding the demobilization of illegal armed groups, leaving it clear that the lax processes that generate an inappropriate decrease in the penalties makes the government responsible.

The plaintiffs are currently continuing to work towards the completion of the whole sentence that was dictated by the Inter-American Court.

47th Extraordinary Session of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

http://www.corteidh.or.cr/medellin/

Mon, 03/18/2013 (All day) - Fri, 03/22/2013 (All day)
Medellin
Colombia

IACHR visit to Colombia

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) will carry out an in loco visit to Colombia from December 3 - 7 2012, following an invitation by the Colombian government.

This will be the first IACHR in loco visit to Colombia since 2004.


IACHR press release here.

 

Fri, 11/30/2012

 

 

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) will carry out an in loco visit to Colombia between the December 3 and 7, 2012, following an invitation by the Colombian government.

 

This will be the first IACHR in loco visit to Colombia since 2004.


IACHR press release here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Venezuela´s withdrawal from the Inter-American Court would undermine the protection of human rights in the country

Statement by International Coalition of Organizations for Human Rights in the Americas

The undersigned organizations, members of the International Coalition of Organizations for Human Rights in the Americas express their profound concern regarding the recent declarations of Hugo Chávez Frías and Nicolás Maduro, President and Foreign Affairs Secretary of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, respectively. The declarations relate to the definitive withdrawal of the Venezuelan State from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

 

Tue, 07/31/2012

July 31, 2012

The undersigned organizations, members of the International Coalition of Organizations for Human Rights in the Americas express their profound concern regarding the recent declarations of Hugo Chávez Frías and Nicolás Maduro, President and Foreign Affairs Secretary of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, respectively. The declarations relate to the definitive withdrawal of the Venezuelan State from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

A measure of this kind would have serious repercussions for the protection of the human rights of Venezuelan citizens, who would not have recourse to justice provided by the Inter-American System’s protection bodies, in instances in which their rights were not effectively protected in their own country.

Both the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission are autonomous and independent bodies that, while exercising their functions, have contributed to the establishment of standards which protect human rights in our region. These organizations have played a fundamental role in the protection of the rights of thousands of victims and citizens on our continent.

Since their creation, the Inter-American Court and Commission have analyzed cases of grave human rights violations and have contributed significantly to the consolidation of democratic institutions, the adoption of legislation which promotes equality and guarantees the protection of human rights, as well as to the struggle against impunity. These bodies have focused particularly on the protection of people or groups in vulnerable situations, the struggle for the eradication of both gender-based violence and discrimination due to sexual orientation, the protection of the rights of indigenous peoples, and the prohibition of both torture as well as the practice of forced disappearance. Moreover, these two bodies have made a considerable contribution to the promotion, development and enhanced protection of economic, social and cultural rights.

The undersigned organizations consider that the Inter-American System fulfills an essential role in our region. Consequently, the potential withdrawal of Venezuela would severely undermine the protection of human rights in this country, and would eliminate the last recourse to justice available to those who have suffered human rights abuses. Venezuela´s announced departure from the Inter-American Court is preceded by its failure to comply with sentences and protection measures ordered by said tribunal. The undersigned organizations urge the Venezuelan government to ratify their commitment to the protection of human rights through the effective compliance with the decisions issued by the Inter-American Court, and to reconsider their claims of withdrawal from the Inter-American System.

Finally, we would like to address the member States of the Organization of American States (OAS) to reiterate our concerns regarding the risk that the withdrawal of Venezuela from one of the bodies of the Inter-American System would represent for the region, Venezuelan citizens, and above all its victims of human rights violations. As such, we call on the members states of the OAS to reaffirm their commitment to the universality of the Inter-American System by taking all necessary actions to ensure that the Venezuelan State reconsiders its decision to remove itself from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Signatories:

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Amnesty International (AI)

Federación Internacional de Derechos Humanos (FIDH)

Peace Brigades International (PBI)

 

REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS:

Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL)

Plataforma Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, Democracia y Desarrollo (PIDHDD)

Lawyers Without Borders- Canada

 

BY COUNTRY

Argentina:

Asociación por los Derechos Civiles (ADC)

Equipo Latinoamericano de Justicia y Género (ELA)

 

Bolivia:

Oficina Jurídica Para la Mujer

Comité de América Latina y el Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer  (CLADEM )

 

Brazil:

Conectas Direitos Humanos

 

Chile:

Corporación Humanas - Chile

 

Colombia:

Comisión Colombiana de Juristas (CCJ)

Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y el Desplazamiento (CODHES)

Corporación Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo (CCAJAR)

Corporación para la Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos – Reiniciar

Grupo Interdisciplinario por los Derechos Humanos (GIDH)

 

Costa Rica:

Defensa de Niñas y Niños – Internacional, DNI Costa Rica

 

Ecuador:

Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo .J.” (CSMM)

Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos (CEDHU)

 

United States:

Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

 

Guatemala:

Asociación Seguridad en Democracia (SEDEM)

Fundación para la Justicia y la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos (FUNJUDEH)

Oficina de Derechos Humanos del Arzobispado de Guatemala (ODHAG)

Unidad de Protección a Defensoras y Defensores de Derechos Humanos (UDEFEGUA)

 

Mexico:

Centro de Derechos Humanos Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez (Prodh)

Grupo de Mujeres de San Cristóbal Las Casas, A.C. (COLEM)

 

Nicaragua:

Centro Nicaragüense de Derechos Humanos (CENIDH)

 

Paraguay

Coordinadora de Derechos Humanos del Paraguay (CODEHUPY)

 

Peru:

Asociación Nacional de Centros (ANC)

Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH)

CEDAL - Centro de Derechos y Desarrollo

Centro de Políticas Públicas y Derechos Humanos - Perú EQUIDAD

Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDDHH)

Fundación Ecuménica para el Desarrollo y la Paz (FEDEPAZ)

 

Uruguay:

Instituto de Estudios Legales y Sociales del Uruguay (IELSUR)

 

Venezuela:

Acción Solidaria en VIH/Sida

Civilis Derechos Humanos

Comisión de Justicia y Paz de la Conferencia Episcopal de Venezuela

Comité de Familiares de Víctimas de los Sucesos de Febrero-Marzo de 1989 (COFAVIC)

Espacio Público

Justicia y Pas Los Teques

Observatorio Venezonalano de Prisiones (OVP)

Oficina de Derechos Humanos de la Diócesis de Los Teques

Programa Venezolano de Educación – Acción en Derechos Humanos (Provea)

Sinergia, Asociación Venezolana de Organizaciones de Sociedad Civil

Transparencia – Venezuela

Una Ventana a la Libertad

Vicaría de Derechos Humanos de Caracas

 

 

Civil Society Letter to President of the Permanent Council

Transparency in the OAS

Distinguished Ambassador Pary Rodríguez:

 

The signatory organizations address your office in order to express our concern about the lack of Civil Society participation in the above-mentioned process, an issue that we consider of great importance.

As already known to you, during the OAS General Assembly, which took place this past June in Cochabamba, Bolivia, the regional States approved Resolution AG/RES.2761 in which they welcomed the report of the Special Working Group to Reflect on the Workings of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with a View to Strengthening the Inter-American Human Rights System.  Additionally, the Resolution instructed the Permanent Council, on the basis of the report, “to draw up proposals for its application in dialogue with all the parties involved,”[1] further providing that said proposals should be presented for consideration before a Special Session of the General Assembly no later than the first quarter of 2013.

 

Wed, 06/20/2012

Distinguished Ambassador Pary Rodríguez:

 

The signatory organizations address your office in order to express our concern about the lack of Civil Society participation in the above-mentioned process, an issue that we consider of great importance.

As already known to you, during the OAS General Assembly, which took place this past June in Cochabamba, Bolivia, the regional States approved Resolution AG/RES.2761 in which they welcomed the report of the Special Working Group to Reflect on the Workings of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with a View to Strengthening the Inter-American Human Rights System.  Additionally, the Resolution instructed the Permanent Council, on the basis of the report, “to draw up proposals for its application in dialogue with all the parties involved,”[1] further providing that said proposals should be presented for consideration before a Special Session of the General Assembly no later than the first quarter of 2013.

In accordance with this mandate, the Permanent Council included this issue in its regular meeting this past June 28th, establishing the formal initiation of the process.  Several days later, the OAS Secretariat for External Relations, through its Department of International Affairs, publicly announced this decision, informing Civil Society that the “Permanent Council will hold informal meetings to define its methodology, work plan, agenda and the manner of consultation.”[2]

In this regard, the signatory organizations consider that the manner in which Civil Society participation has been incorporated into the discussions ordered by the General Assembly in its Resolution does not constitute a process of real and effective participation consistent with the principles the OAS has established on the issue.

The OAS has recognized on numerous occasions the importance of the participation of Civil Society organizations.  In fact, the Inter-American Democratic Charter reaffirms the principle that the promotion of Civil Society participation in OAS activities strengthens democratic institutions in the region; similarly and on the occasion of the 5th Summit of the Americas, held in Puerto España, the regional heads of State expressed their commitment to stimulating full participation of Civil Society in the Inter-American System (¶ 94).[3]

More recently, during the last General Assembly, the States of the region adopted Resolution AG/RES. 2736 (XLII-O/12),[4] in which they committed to broadening and guaranteeing dialogue with and participation of civil society through various means.

In light of the above and given the importance of the issue being discussed by the Permanent Council, namely the strengthening of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, the signatory organizations consider that the resulting process to be adopted must ensure adequate means, opportunities and forums so that the participation of Civil Society may be real and effective and guarantee a true dialogue amongst all parties involved.

In this sense, we respectfully appeal for the re-adoption of the standards fixed by the General Assembly with respect to Civil Society participation and that, at minimum, the following be guaranteed:

  • Transparent discussions at the regional level (within the Permanent Council or other instance at the OAS), as well as within the States;
  • Consultative procedures are implemented in the States, extending beyond country capitals particularly in larger countries where it may be more difficult for Civil Society to respond to invitations in the capital;
  • Recognition of the value of using resources from the Specific Fund to finance the participation of Civil Society organizations and other social actors in discussions about the issue of strengthening the Inter-American Commission  To contemplate and implement innovative methods, other than in-person interventions during the Permanent Council sessions that go beyond the formal circulation of documents.  Tools such as real-time long distance participation and live webcast transmissions of all discussions should be guaranteed as a minimum to enable informed contributions with respect to the various issues that are discussed
  • Ensure a dynamic that facilitates dialogue during meetings and in each of the debates established by the Permanent Council that would not only be by formal written participation.  It is clear that participation cannot be reduced to occasional moments, but rather must be ensured throughout the process, something which was not previously guaranteed in the procedures prior to the discussion of the Working Group report.  Given that the very same day the IACHR was still conducting hearings, numerous organizations and civil servants from various countries were unable to participate in the so-called dialogue[5]

Based on the aforementioned, we consider it critical that, as a minimum and prior to any substantive discussion on the issue, during the upcoming session of the Permanent Council, a methodology can be worked out that establishes means for disseminating information, a delineation of the various actors involved in the discussion on strengthening the Inter-American Commission, an identification of forums for real participation, as well as a calendar of meeting and events that will be held in Washington, as well as within the States during the coming months.

We wish to insist on the need to generate opportunities for effective participation on each of the discussion points and in each of the meetings held on this issue concerning the continuity of the Inter-American System for the protection of human rights.

The signatory organizations respectfully request that we be heard by the States and that our opinions and contributions be taken into account, not only when the recommendations of the Working Group report are discussed, but also when methodological and scheduling issues need to be resolved.

We thank you in advance for your attention and look forward to your response.

 

cc. José Miguel Insulza. Secretary General of the OAS.

cc. José de Jesús Orozco, President, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

 

Signatory Organizations

Regional

Amazon Watch

Amnistía Internacional

Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA)

Campaña por una Convención Interamericana por los Derechos Sexuales y los Derechos Reproductivos

Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (CEJIL)

Coalición LGBTTTI Trabajando en la OEA

Comité de América Latina y el Caribe por la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer (CLADEM)

Confluencia Feminista Mesoamericana Las Petateras

International Pregnancy Advisory Services (Servicios Internacionales de Asesoría sobre el Embarazo) IPAS – Centroamérica

Plataforma Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, Democracia y Desarrollo (PIDHDD)

Red latinoamericana y caribeña por la defensa de los derechos de los niños, niñas y adolescentes (Redlamyc)

Servicio Paz y Justicia en América Latina (SERPAJ – AL)

 

Bolivia

Oficina Jurídica Para la Mujer

 

Brasil

Grupo Tortura Nunca Mais - Rio de Janeiro

ISER- Instituto de Estudos da Religião

Chile

Corporación Humanas

 

Colombia

Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo (CCAJAR)

Comisión Colombiana de Juristas (CCJ)

Corporación para la Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos REINICIAR

Grupo Interdisciplinario por los Derechos Humanos (GIDH)

Peace Brigades International - Colombia Project

 

Costa Rica

Alianza por tus Derechos

 

Ecuador

Acción Ecológica

Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo S. J.” (CSMM)

Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos (CEDHU)

Fundación Pachamama

 

El Salvador

Asociación Pro-Búsqueda de Niños y Niñas Desaparecidos (PROBUSQUEDA)

Comité de Familiares de Migrantes Fallecidos y Desaparecidos de El Salvador (COFAMIDE)

Fundación de Estudios para la Aplicación del Derecho (FESPAD)

Instituto de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Centroamericana “José Simeón Cañas” (IDHUCA)

Instituto de Estudios de la Mujer "Norma Virginia Guirola de Herrera" (CEMUJER)

Organización de Mujeres Salvadoreñas (ORMUSA)

 

Estados Unidos

Human Rights Clinic, University of Texas

US Office on Colombia

Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

Guatemala

Fundación Myrna Mack, Guatemala

Instituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales de Guatemala (ICCPG)

Movimiento Social por los Derechos de la Niñez, Adolescencia y Juventud en Guatemala (90 organizaciones)

Unidad de Protección a Defensoras y Defensores de Derechos Humanos

 

Honduras

Asociación Cooperación Técnica Nacional (CTN)

Asociación de Jueces por la Democracia (AJD)

Asociación LGTB Arco Iris

Asociación para una vida mejor de personas infectadas/afectadas por el VIH-Sida en Honduras (APUVIMEH)

Casa Alianza

Centro de Investigación para la Prevención de la Violencia

Centro de Investigación y Promoción de Derechos Humanos en Honduras (CIPRODEH)

Centro para la prevención, tratamiento y rehabilitación de las víctimas de tortura y sus familiares (CPTRT)

Coalición Nacional de Mujeres de Honduras (CONAMUH)

Colectiva de Mujeres Hondureñas (CODEMUH)

Comité de Derechos Humanos de Honduras (CODEH)

Comité por la Libre Expresión  (C-LIBRE), Honduras

Convergencia por los Derechos Humanos de la Zona Nor Occidental

Equipo de Reflexión, Investigación y Comunicación de la Compañía de Jesús (ERIC)

Foro de Mujeres por la Vida

Foro Nacional para las Migraciones de Honduras (FONAMIH)

Gran Alianza por OMOA

Movimiento de Mujeres por la Paz Visitación Padilla

Organización Fraternal Negra de Honduras (OFRANEH)

Tribuna de Mujeres contra los Femicidios

 

México

Abogadas y Abogados para la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos, A. C.

Acción Urgente para Defensores de los Derechos Humanos, A.C. (ACCUDEH)

Centro de Derechos Humanos de la Montaña “Tlachinollan”, A.C. (Tlachinollan)

Centro de Derechos Humanos de las Mujeres, A. C.  (CEDHEM)

Centro de Derechos Humanos Fray Bartolomé de las Casas A.C.

Centro de Derechos Humanos Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez, A.C. (Prodh)

Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental, A.C. (CEMDA)

Ciudadanos en Apoyo a los Derechos Humanos, A.C. (CADHAC)

Comisión de Solidaridad y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos, A.C. (COSYDDHAC)

Comité de Defensa Integral de Derechos Humanos Gobixha (Código DH)

Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado Democrático de Derecho

Grupo de Mujeres de San Cristóbal de las Casas, A.C.

i(dh)eas, Litigio Estratégico en Derechos Humanos, A.C. (IDHEAS)

Red Nacional de Organismos Civiles de Derechos Humanos "Todos los Derechos para Todas y Todos" integrada por 71 organizaciones en 21 estados de la República mexicana.

Servicios Legales e Investigación y Estudios Jurídicos (SLIEJ)

 

Nicaragua

Casa Alianza

Centro de Asistencia Legal a Pueblos Indígenas (CALPI)

Centro de Información y Servicios de Asesoría en Salud (SISAS)

Centro de Investigaciones de la Comunicación (CINCO)

Centro Nicaragüense de Derechos Humanos (CENIDH)

Comisión Permanente de Derechos Humanos (CPDH)

FIBRAS/Movimiento por Nicaragua

Movimiento Autónomo de Mujeres

Movimiento contra el abuso sexual

Movimiento Feminista de Nicaragua

Oficina de asistencia técnica para el desarrollo y la equidad (CIFEM), Nicaragua

Red de Mujeres contra la Violencia

Panamá

Alianza Ciudadana Pro Justicia, Panamá

Centro de Asistencia Legal Popular (CEALP)

Centro de Incidencia Ambiental (CIAM)

Centro de Iniciativas Democráticas (CIDEM)

Instituto de Derecho Agrario, Ambiental e Indígena

 

Paraguay

BASE Investigaciones Sociales,

Servicio Paz y Justicia (SERPAJ)

Coordinadora de Derechos Humanos del Paraguay (CODEHUPY)

 

Perú

Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (Aprodeh)

CEDAL-Centro de Derechos y Desarrollo

Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos

 

Uruguay

Instituto de Estudios Legales y Sociales del Uruguay (IELSUR)

 

Venezuela

Acción Solidaria en VIH/Sida

Centro de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Católica Andrés Bello

Civilis Derechos Humanos

Comité de Familiares de las Víctimas de los sucesos ocurridos entre el 27 de febrero y los primeros días de marzo de 1989 (COFAVIC)

Espacio Público

Programa Venezolano de Educación – Acción en Derechos Humanos (Provea)

Sinergia, Asociación Venezolana de Organizaciones de Sociedad Civil

Vicaría de Derechos Humanos de Caracas

 

[1] AG/RES. 2761 (XLII-O/12), Follow-up on the Recommendations Contained in the “Report of the Special Working Group to Reflect on the Workings of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with a View to strengthening the Inter-American Human Rights System,” adopted at the fourth plenary session of the General Assembly in Bolivia, held on June 5, 2012.  Paragraph two establishes, “To instruct the Permanent Council, on the basis of the report, to draw up proposals for its application in dialogue with all the parties involved.”

[2] Email dated July 5, 2012 disseminated through the list osc_registradas@lists.oas.org by the Directorship of the Department of International Affairs, of the OAS Secretariat for External Relations, titled, “OEA - Consulta - Recomendaciones sobre el Funcionamiento de la CIDH y el Fortalecimiento del SIDH | OAS - Consultation - Recommendations on the Functioning of the IACHR and the Strengthening of the IASHR”.

[3] “We commit to continue encouraging the participation of our peoples, through the engagement of our citizens, communities and civil society in the design and execution of development policies and programs, by providing technical and financial assistance, as appropriate, and in accordance with national legislation to strengthen and build their capacity to participate more fully in the inter-American system.” Puerto España Declaration, 2009, ¶ 94, available at http://www.summit-americas.org/sisca/cs_sp.html.

[4] OAS. Increasing and Strengthening the Participation of civil society and Social Actors in the Activities of the Organization of American States. AG/RES. 2736 (XLII-O/12), adopted at the second plenary session, held on June 4, 2012.

[5] In that respect, according the calendar of IACHR sessions, that same day, hearings were held in relation to Canada, Haiti, Chile, Brasil, Panama, and El Salvador, as well as regional hearings on the situation of human rights of LGBTI persons in the Americas; citizen security and human rights in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras; the situation of human rights of afro-descendant women in Latin America; situation of the right to freedom of association in the Americas; and the situation of human rights defenders in Mesoamerica.  For more information on the 143rd period of IACHR sessions, see: http://www.cidh.oas.org/pdf%20files/Calendario143.pdf

Syndicate content