Concerns about Peru’s candidacy for Assistant Secretary General of the OAS: An Aspiration Incompatible with the State’s Commitment to the Fundamental Pillars of the Body

Washington D.C., April 2, 2025. –We, the undersigned civil society organizations, express our concern regarding the candidacy submitted by the Peruvian State for Assistant Secretary General (ASG) of the OAS, whose election is scheduled for March 5, 2025 and is, at the moment, the only official candidate.  

The OAS is a body built on four essential pillars: democracy, human rights, security and integral development. The ASG plays a key role in the promotion and coordination of these mandates, coordinating political decisions, supervising technical and cooperation programmes, and strengthening dialogue between Member States and in key spaces such as the General Assembly. Likewise, the ASG leads institutional efforts to promote the effective participation of civil society organizations (CSOs) in OAS multilateral processes, coordinating thematic and regional dialogues, in collaboration with the Civil Society Participation Section, and expressing their views in forums such as the General Assembly, the Summit of the Americas and Permanent Council meetings.

In this context, and without meaning to analyze the qualifications of the nominees, we consider it important to reflect on the commitment of States aspiring to positions of great responsibility within the organization to the values that are the basis of its objectives and pillars. The submission of a candidate for a position of this nature must be consistent with the national and international policies of the applicant state, particularly those that promote and protect the principles that the position is called upon to defend.

In the case of the Peruvian State, there is documented evidence of actions, practices, and measures that give legitimate cause for concern and that undermine fundamental aspects of the effective functioning of the OAS, in particular the protection of the rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR), such as access to justice and reparation, and the participation without retaliation of victims and human rights defenders in the Organization’s human rights protection spaces. These actions are particularly concerning in the context of being the only country with a candidate for Assistant Secretary General, a position that entails the responsibility of promoting and coordinating the body’s mandates. Among the actions, practices, and legislation, the following are particularly noteworthy:

1.Proposals to denounce the American Convention on Human Rights and the OAS Charter: The Peruvian Congress is promoting reforms that seek to separate the country from the ACHR and to remove the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (I-A Court). These proposals include the approved reform of the Constitutional Procedural Code of October 2024, which limits the binding force of the I-A Court’s decisions in cases where Peru is not a party, as well as attempts to remove the power of Peruvian judges to not apply unconventional laws, meaning that they would no longer be able to carry out an independent analysis to ensure that the laws respect the international human rights treaties that the country has signed. These measures promote impunity and affect the functioning of the Inter-American Human Rights System.

2.Contempt by the three branches of the State for the decisions of the I-A Court: The Peruvian state’s nomination for the Assistant Secretary General of the OAS is overshadowed by the repeated contempt shown by the three branches of the state towards the decisions of the I-A Court. A clear example is the release of Alberto Fujimori in December 2023, in open defiance of an explicit order from the I-A Court prohibiting his release due to the risk he posed to the rights of the victims in the Barrios Altos and La Cantuta cases. Furthermore, in August 2024, Congress approved the “Law specifying the application and scope of crimes against humanity and war crimes,” ignoring a resolution of the I-A Court that ordered a stop to its enactment. This law not only undermines the right of victims to access to justice, but also reflects the Peruvian state’s stance of denial regarding the crimes committed during the internal armed conflict, guaranteeing impunity and violating the fundamental principles of international law.

3.Restrictions on the participation of civil society and international cooperation: In a context of increasing official discourse that harasses and increases the risk for defenders, the Peruvian Congress has promoted legislative initiatives to restrict the functioning of civil society organizations. On March 12, 2025, it approved the “Law that modifies the Law of Creation of the Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation” (APCI, for its initials in Spanish). This law grants excessive powers to the APCI to oversee international cooperation and to sanction those who use these resources to litigate against the Peruvian State in national or international courts. Such regulations severely restrict the rights of assembly, association and freedom of expression of civil society organizations and arbitrarily deprive the victims of their legal representatives in cases before international courts, including before the bodies of the Inter-American Human Rights System. Faced with this legislation, the Executive Branch- who also proposes the ASG candidacy – has remained silent and is not expected to veto or take any measures to prevent the implementation of the law.

4.Weakening of democracy and the concentration of power: Democracy in Peru is being severely affected by the weakening of key institutions such as the National Elections Board (JNE, for its initials in Spanish), the National Justice Board (JNJ, for its initials in Spanish), the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Ombudsman’s Office. This weakening of checks and balances has allowed Congress to act without effective oversight, promoting reforms that violate human rights. For example, the State has adopted measures that contradict its international obligations and the decisions issued by the Inter-American Court in cases against the State, including declaring a statute of limitations on crimes against humanity, granting amnesties to members of the armed forces and restricting the work of civil society organizations.

The legitimacy, effectiveness and integrity of the OAS depend, to a large extent, on the credibility of its leadership. Part of the process of selecting candidates for positions of great responsibility should include, in addition to an evaluation of personal qualifications, a rigorous evaluation of the commitment of the proposing state to the promotion and protection of the values that the position is called upon to defend. We trust that the Member States will give this due consideration, in the interest of ensuring that the OAS continues to be a solid pillar of democracy and human rights in the region.

Likewise, it is concerning that, to date, this is the only nomination submitted, limiting the possibility of a competitive and enriching process for the Organization. We encourage Member States to consider submitting additional candidates, prioritizing the participation of women and thus ensuring an election based on a variety of options and the strengthening of the OAS mandate.

Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL)

Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights (RFK)

Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)