Information exchange session

INFORMATION SESSION, MAY 24, 2001

The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade organized another information session last May 24 to allow Canadian civil society organizations interested in inter-American issues to exchange views and ask questions about the Summit of the Americas, as well as to gather information and offer their opinions and suggestions about Canada's priorities for the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS) in San José (June 3-5, 2001).

The OAS General Assembly in San José is of particular importance for Canada as it will offer a chance to follow up on numerous commitments made only six weeks previously by the heads of state and government at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City. It is also the follow-up to the General Assembly held in Windsor in June 2000. Themes will include the strengthening of the inter-American human rights system, this being the priority theme chosen by the host country; the Democratic Charter, for the purpose of making operational the democracy clause of the Quebec City Summit; and the modernization and restructuring of the OAS in the context of the Summit of the Americas process.

The information session was chaired by the Canadian Ambassador to the OAS, Peter Boehm, accompanied by the Director of the Inter-American Division at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Michael Brock, with the participation of 22 representatives of a variety of civil society organizations and officials from various divisions of DFAIT and CIDA. A number of draft documents for discussion at the General Assembly were available on the OAS Web site.

Introduction of the Canadian Ambassador to the OAS

Ambassador Boehm began by mentioning that, for the last four years, the general assemblies have been using a different format, which allows for more lively roundtable discussion. At Windsor, in fact, the themes discussed at the private ministers' dialogue which now precedes the plenary session became the main themes of the Summit. As the host country is free to choose the central theme, Costa Rica has selected the importance of the inter-American human rights system as the primary theme, in addition to two other important topics emerging from the Quebec City Summit, namely the Democratic Charter and the connection between the Summit and the OAS as the main political organization for the region. For example, how is the Summit influencing the modernization of the OAS, an organization that has its own charter? Next, the Ambassador quickly reviewed the various resolutions that will be tabled this year, on crime, drugs, human rights, natural disasters, and the promotion and facilitation of participation by civil society in the OAS. With regard to sensitive political issues this year, he recalled how the situation in Peru had monopolized discussion at the General Assembly in Windsor, and how the OAS and Canada had then played a key role in restoring democratic order in that country; now, on the eve of the San José General Assembly, the second round of presidential elections would be taking place, and all were expecting it to proceed without any irregularities. The other sensitive issue was Haiti, where the OAS has to enhance its role in accordance with the directives of the heads of state and government issued during the Summit. Finally, the agenda of the San José General Assembly also included a meeting between the ministers and some 50 civil society organizations accredited as observers this year. Ambassador Boehm pointed out that Windsor had been a first step in this direction, as the Secretary General of the OAS and the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs had held talks there with a number of civil society organizations taking part in a parallel forum. About 40 of them had observer status in Windsor, a recent practice for the Assembly which is working well.

Discussion with participants

Rights and Democracy asked for an update on the Democratic Charter. Ambassador Boehm said that a first draft had been prepared by Peru, then another more reinforced draft by Mexico, and then a group of friends had been formed on the initiative of Peru to move the discussion forward. This group includes Peru, Canada, Argentina, Costa Rica and the United States. Canada was of the opinion that the first draft did not meet the mandate of the Quebec City Summit. At the same time, the Ambassador reiterated the traditional apprehensions on the issues of sovereignty and intervention, and the importance of taking this fine line into account, as we had done when negotiating resolutions 1753 on Peru and 1080 on coups d'état. He also indicated that it is very clear for Canada, although not for all of the countries, that the Quebec democracy clause is applicable to the overall Summit of the Americas process, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas and the Inter-American Development Bank. Rights and Democracy also sought information on the Charter adoption process and on whether there would be consultations. Michael Brock answered that we were listening to the views expressed at this information session and had taken into consideration the few points received from various experts, including Rights and Democracy on the democracy clause, three weeks before the Summit of the Americas. The Ambassador said that he had not been informed about any consultations at this stage at the OAS level.

Rights and Democracy expressed its concern that there was no additional funding for the inter-American human rights system even though this was among the commitments made by the heads at Quebec City. The Ambassador responded that, for the first time, the Secretary General of the OAS had asked his various units to estimate the funding required to implement the commitments made at the Summit, so as to then set priorities and be in a position to better fulfil the commitments made at Quebec City.

The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) asked whether the Charter contained a definition of democracy. For example, did the OAS intend to target countries with situations similar to that of Haiti, or to include in the Charter situational assessments such as the impact on neighbouring peoples and countries of the Colombia Plan and the level of militarization in a country? Ambassador Boehm assured the Congress that it was not the intention of the Charter to isolate small countries, pointing out that CARICOM had been very much involved in the joint OASCARICOM mission recently conducted in Haiti. He said that the Charter needs a certain amount of flexibility to be truly effective. It must also deal with the question of how to bring a country back into the OAS if it is ever excluded, and must include a system of preventive measures. He noted that Colombia was an interesting case, since it has proper elections and so forth, yet there is a civil war going on. The CLC also underscored the importance of preserving workers' rights in the context of a deterioration of democracy, citing the fact that one of the first actions taken by dictators is to do away with collective rights and unions. Ambassador Boehm answered that if the Charter is adopted, there will be an appropriate reference to workers' rights. He also said that the region's labour ministers, who would be meeting in Canada in October 2001, could take this issue into consideration, and that he recently discussed the matter with the Minister of Labour.

Max Cameron, of the University of British Columbia, said that in his opinion the first draft had no teeth; he asked if it was not the intention of the OAS to be content with a repackaging of existing instruments without expanding their scope. He also pointed out that there was no reference to expulsion from the Summit of the Americas, including the FTAA, but only from the OAS; asked for explanations about the threats to democracy that the Charter might cover, beyond coups d'état; and said that there was no mention of a strengthening of Resolution 1080, which he considered important for making the OAS response more automatic. Ambassador Boehm answered that resolution 1080 was still in effect. He said that Canada was working on the issue of threats to democracy, and that there are constitutional as well as unconstitutional changes that are not democratic: it was a complex matter. He also said that a few countries, Canada among them, thought it relevant to explain the different threats, but in the end the important thing was to have a viable Charter. Finally, he explained that the economic issue is complex: there is the Summit of the Americas, which is relatively new, on the one hand, and the OAS, which is relatively old, on the other, and no legal relationship between the two. So what we are trying to do is to get a clear reference on the Summit in the Charter, which for us includes the IDB and FTAA, but not all of the countries see things this way. We want to be sure that we have enough of a political commitment so that the economic consequences can follow.

Amnesty International expressed its concern that human rights be clearly expressed as an integral part of democracy. This was a conclusion of the Quebec City Summit and must be recognized in the Charter. Ambassador Boehm answered that the Charter now contains two specific links between human rights and democracy. He felt that Dr. Cameron's suggestion of assigning an oversight function to the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights and Commission on Human Rights was interesting, and that it would be interesting to consider eventually establishing a Commission on Democracy parallel to the Commission on Human Rights, but this would still leave us faced with the OAS's serious resources problem. All the same, he thought it was an idea to keep in mind.

FOCAL said it was encouraged by Ambassador Boehm's responses and by the Canadian position, and emphasized that the commitments on democracy made by the heads at the Summit went much further than simply listing the existing OAS instruments. FOCAL cited the example of Venezuela, which is circumventing these instruments: hence the need to reinforce them so as to correct their deficiencies. It offered the opinion that it might be better not to have a Charter right away than to have one that is weak. There was a real risk of the major achievements of the Quebec Summit being lost. Ambassador Boehm concurred, mentioning the magnitude of the challenge. FOCAL also pointed out the relatively limited significance the Charter seems to ascribe to the participation of civil society. Ambassador Boehm responded that this was a question we were working on, adding that we wanted to make progress on the concept of the civil society at the OAS, a concept which we regard as comprehensive and extending beyond NGOs to represent the full diversity of non-governmental social stakeholders.

The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) said that it would be doing follow-up to ensure that the discussions of Conclave 1 in Guatemala and of the Ottawa Indigenous Peoples' Summit of the Americas were reflected in the implementation of the Quebec City Summit. It also requested an update on the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, particularly on what specific action would be taken and what indigenous representation was being considered. Ambassador Boehm said that the Plan of Action called for the establishment of a special fund to facilitate indigenous participation throughout the hemisphere in the meetings on the Declaration; this would help bolster the momentum of the last year and a half. On the Canadian position, he said that we had pushed hard to allow indigenous representatives to take part in the discussion, and that the address of Phil Fontaine before the Permanent Council of the OAS was a big help. We also acknowledge that experience at the United Nations can be improved at the interAmerican level. The AFN added that indigenous groups around the world perceive the AFN as a leader and that it is important to take this into consideration.

Transparency International felt that there had been progress with the InterAmerican Convention on Corruption, especially the recent meeting on this theme in Buenos Aires in May. However TI commented that the resolution adopted was weak, and that even the OECD monitoring directives, for example, were stronger. Ambassador Boehm confirmed that the report and resolution resulting from the Buenos Aires meeting had since been approved at the Permanent Council, as well as the resolution on corporate social responsibility. He said he felt that the monitoring issue can be strengthened gradually. TI went on to say that in its opinion the role of civil society should be strengthened in these texts. Ambassador Boehm informed it that Canada had just tabled a resolution on the civil society, to augment its role, emphasize its diversity and simplify procedures for its participation in the OAS; the draft resolution includes the directive to organize annual consultations at the OAS, somewhat like the annual consultations organized by the Department of Foreign Affairs on human rights. However the Ambassador admitted that this draft resolution did not have consensus agreement and would need some hard work. The comfort level is increased by the fact that many organizations are now registered with the OAS and more and more are participating as observers in the General Assembly, and the organization has not suffered for this - quite the contrary.

The Canadian Association for Community Living conveyed its president's thanks to Ambassador Boehm for supporting the inclusion of mentions of persons with disabilities in the Quebec Summit documents, and asked whether there was a specific process whereby the OAS would be providing follow-up for the Summit. Ambassador Boehm said that one of the success stories of the Quebec Summit was that regional and international banks were more interested in supporting the commitments made. Canada has also suggested to the banks and institutions involved in the Summit, including the OAS, that they meet regularly to coordinate different programs and avoid duplication of effort or lack of follow-up on certain commitments. On the issue of persons with disabilities, the Ambassador said that it was now time for the Convention on this theme to be made operational.

The Environmental Law Association was interested in follow-up for the Quebec City Plan of Action on the environment. The Ambassador responded that the Plan of Action did indeed contain environmental commitments, but that the OAS did not have sufficient resources to see to its follow-up, apart from subjects such as risk assessment and management of natural disasters. That follow-up would take place at the level of the regional Environment ministers, who had convened in Canada in March in preparation for the Summit, as well as through existing international mechanisms such as the Kyoto Protocol.

World Vision Canada pointed out that not many countries have ratified the InterAmerican Convention on the Rights of the Child, and asked how these rights can be reinforced. Ambassador Boehm answered that the Quebec City Plan of Action included the following points on the inter-American human rights system: 1) support for its implementation; 2) need to increase funding; 3) need to universalize the system and secure commitment to it from all countries. On children, it is hoped that we can manage to expand the ratification and strengthen the system. There is a special rapporteur on this theme but he is responsible for other subjects as well; he could do more. CIDA has already announced this type of support for the Inter-American Children's Institute during the Quebec City Summit.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission noted that the Summit documents stress the importance of building the capacity of national human rights institutions but that the Charter did not mention this so clearly. For the Commission, the Charter is an excellent opportunity to highlight the importance of the role of national institutions. Ambassador Boehm was of the same opinion. He said that this concern was part of the strengthening of the inter-American human rights system.

The Canadian Council for International Cooperation explained that, for various reasons, the Peoples' Summit had chosen not to attend the roundtable with the ministers that was organized for the civil society at the time of the Summit, and asked how the declaration of the People's Summit would be taken into consideration at the OAS and if there would be any major deliberation on the demonstrations that took place in Quebec City. Ambassador Boehm answered that there was a sense among the various delegations that the Quebec City Plan of Action responds to many of the concerns expressed at the Peoples' Summit, and that there could have been more cooperation between the Peoples' Summit and the official Summit. He said that he took part, along with the Minister for International Cooperation, in the thematic forum on human rights, and noticed that the participants were pursuing the same goals, but the region is constantly confronted with the question of resources. He added that the delegates were concerned that so much media attention in Canada had been focussed on the violent demonstrations as opposed to the Summit's discussions or the largely peaceful proceedings of the Peoples' Summit.

_{Report prepared by the Inter-American Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade}