The OAS and Civil Society

Since 1997, the OAS has been actively facilitating greater participation of civil society in its political and administrative structure. Recognizing the important role played by civil society organizations, the OAS has created a space in which they can be integrated into the process of dialogue and decision-making. As a result, the Organization has been able to include a diversity of opinions, experiences and points of view in its work.

While in some technical areas the relationship between non-state actors and the OAS dates back to the first years of the Organization's existence, it is only with the establishment of the Summits of the Americas process that this issue has been integrated into the inter-American agenda. A year and a half after Quebec City, the opportunities for civil society participation are ever-increasing: on discussions about the Democratic Charter; on issues such as hemispheric security, indigenous peoples, social corporate responsibility and political parties; and in the Committees on Inter-American Summits Management and the Participation of Civil Society in OAS Activities. The OAS accreditation process for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is also in effect, as is the annual meeting of NGOs with ministers of foreign affairs at each General Assembly.

In the preparatory process for and during the actual Quebec City Summit, there were institutional spaces that allowed for the incorporation of various concerns of non-state actors from different sectors of society into the Summit Plan of Action. Also underway is an extensive follow-up and consultation process among civil society on the Summit process, which includes the participation of over 800 NGOs from 16 countries. 

These new possibilities for non-state actors in national public matters and multilateral processes reflect profound changes in the very structure of the state and in the work of international institutions. Today decisions that affect our societies are made through democratic processes that in general allow for more direct and continuous participation by the diverse social sectors affected by such decisions. More and more, national reforms and multilateral negotiations take into consideration voices of citizens from throughout the region.

This participation has a different nature than that of political actors, since its legitimacy lies not in its "representative" nature but in its reaffirmation of the new reality of societies, of individuals, of citizens with rights and a multiplicity of individual and collective interests. As a result, instruments of pressure and resistance have been brought to bear to limit the excessive power of the state, both in society and within the political structure itself.

In that context, the Summits of the Americas Secretariat – which is responsible, within the OAS General Secretariat, for supporting the participation of non-state actors in the Organization’s activities and in the Summit process – seeks to promote a balanced, open and intelligent relationship between the various non-state actors, governments and international institutions. Its objective is to articulate a new relationship between the state and civil society in light of a new social agenda that demands the cooperation of both parties. Experience shows us that such participation is essential in the reduction of poverty, in education and health, and in the fight against corruption, among other issues. It is also an effective tool in the strengthening of democracy and an antidote to totalitarian or populist temptations.

Today the ability of citizens to mobilize for public causes is on the rise. In Latin America, this approach was effective in resisting military regimes and promoting the democratic process. It is therefore in governments’ own interests to foster a partnership with non-state actors in order to generate effective solutions for the urgent social and cultural concerns of our time. This is not easy, since it implies the development of a different culture, a change in mentality and a true rupture from history. An even greater difficulty is that this kind of partnership goes against the whole logic of the concept of power, which drives politics. There is, in effect, a contradiction between the very nature of the political system and its link to the idea of power in juxtaposition with a civil society whose goal is precisely to limit this power, affecting decisions, opening processes of transparency and imposing transactions and commitments.

In highly institutionalized countries in which the exercise of power is checked by other powers and pressure groups, it is less difficult to open spaces for civil society. However, in institutionally weak countries that have a long authoritarian and caudillista tradition, as well as rigid and closed governmental mechanisms, this process is much more difficult to carry out. However, there can be no doubt that the trend toward greater openness is well underway and nothing points to its slowing down. The Summit process has supported a genuine transition towards new avenues of participation and toward more open and transparent societies, both of which are good for the stability and health of democracy in the XXI Century.