NGOs demand transparency and participation in the appointment process of the Auditor General of the Office of Administrative Investigations and Public Ethics.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Press release

The undersigned request an open and participatory process that guarantees the appointment of a candidate with accredited background, suitability and independence to occupy the position of head auditor of the Office of Administrative Investigations and Public Ethics of the Province of Mendoza, created by Law No. 8993 .

The office is a fundamental organ for the supervision of the correct acting in the public function, for the control of the presentation of sworn statements, as well as an indispensable institution to guarantee transparency in all areas of the State. Moreover, this office will ensure transparency in the actions of politicians, trade unionists and State contractors. To this, it must be added that if the Chamber of Deputies approves the Bill on Access to Public Information, which already has a half sanction, this office will also be responsible for its implementation and compliance.

Therefore, we consider that the appointment should be made on the basis of the characteristics required by the function of own control of the position: independence of those to whom it must control and technical suitability.

Although the law does not foresee this, this would be facilitated if a participatory, open and transparent procedure was established so that whoever is selected is the best possible candidate.

In order to guarantee the performance of a procedure of these characteristics, a series of actions are proposed that are detailed below.

  • Instance of citizen participation to present proposals for candidates to occupy the position. Enable an instance of participation in which citizens can submit candidates not considered by the Executive Power, which are part of the selection process. This will allow to discuss and analyze the applications in a reasoned manner, ensuring that the designated person is the most suitable to occupy the position.
  • Transparency of candidacies. Make public the candidacies, making information available to citizens about the profiles and background of each of the candidates.
  • Instance prior to the public hearing to present observations and challenges to the candidacies. Instance that allows the formulation of questions to the candidates, as well as observations and challenges to their application.
  • Response by the candidates to the observations, challenges and questions asked in the previous stage, being able to attach evidence or additional information.
  • Selection of the candidate to be proposed by the Executive, based on the election of the candidate over the rest of the candidates.
  • Public Hearing: Conducting a Public Hearing in compliance with the provisions of the Regulation of the Chamber of Senators for public hearings, making available to civil society the information provided in article 33 and other relevant provisions.
  • Treatment in the Senate to approve or not the candidate.

The success of the institutionalization of an organ such as that created by the law depends to a large extent on its first occupant. Only with independence and suitability, can guarantee the main objective provided by the law “to regulate the rules of conduct that should govern in the exercise of public function for its responsible, honest, fair, dignified and transparent performance by those who hold the obligation to develop it, in any of the hierarchies, forms or places where they exercise it “(Article 1, Provincial Law No. 8993).

Adhere to the note

    Centro Latinoamericano de Derechos Humanos (CLADH)
    Federación de Entidades no Gubernamentales de Niñez y Adolescencia de Mendoza (FEDEM)
    Asociación de Cooperativas Vitivinícolas Argentinas (ACOVI)
    Asociación Mendocina de Expendedores de Naftas y Afines (AMENA)
    INTEGRAR Centro de Estudios y Desarrollo de Políticas Públicas
    Asociación Civil VALOS
    Fundación AVINA
    Fundación para el Desarrollo de Políticas Sustentables (FUNDEPS)
    Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ)

Last Friday, FUNDEPS together with Alida Weht, neighbor of the Chacras de la Merced district, presented information requests in the Municipality of Córdoba, in relation to the fulfillment of the Mitigation Plan implemented in the E.D.A.R. of Bajo Grande and in the area located downstream.

On April 24, 2017, the Municipality of Córdoba declared an environmental and sanitary emergency in the Wastewater Treatment Plant (E.D.A.R.) of Bajo Grande and in the area located downstream. He did it through Decree No. 1292 and it was for 180 days.

This is not the first time that the environmental and health emergency has been declared due to the plant’s malfunctioning and the existing contamination in the area of ​​Chacras de la Merced and downstream, which has been happening since 2014.

In fact, Mayor Ramón Javier Mestre, through Decree No. 2447, entrusted the different municipal departments with the necessary actions to implement the Mitigation Plan in the context of the environmental and health emergency, declared on August 5, 2014 and 180 days.

In June 2015, Decree No. 1220 once again declares the environmental and sanitary emergency of the plant for a period of 120 days, which is extended for an additional 120 days by Decree No. 3745 of December 2, 2015, to the aims of mitigating the environmental and sanitary effects until the optimization of the functioning of the plant.

Last year, due to new complaints from the employees of the Bajo Grande plant, which warn not only that the plant does not work at 100% capacity -requires improvements and essential repairs-, but that the sewage liquids are overturned without previous treatment to Rio Suquía -, added to the concern generated by the results of the samples taken by the Environmental Police and the laboratories of the plant itself, led to a new declaration of emergency by the Municipal Executive.

Likewise, Decree No. 1292 contemplates the fulfillment of a Mitigation Plan – continuation of the one prepared in 2014 – by virtue of which a number of measures and actions were entrusted to different areas of the Municipality of Córdoba, which were to be executed in complete by the end of October 2017.

For this reason, last Friday, FUNDEPS together with Alida Weht, neighbor of the Chacras de las Merced district and member of the Las Omas Civil Association, presented requests for information addressed to the Secretary of Government, Citizen Participation and Social Development; to the General Secretariat, the Public Services Secretariat, the Ministry of Health and the Secretariat of Planning and Infrastructure of the Municipality of Córdoba.

As for the mitigation measures contemplated in the plan, these are: a) Update of the socioeconomic survey of the affected population downstream of the plant; b) Update of the survey of the health status of the population; c) Distribution of safe drinking water for different uses in areas where provision by network is not possible; d) Preventive sanitary cord; e) Management of the effluents of the E.D.A.R. Under Large; e) Resource monitoring plan and f) Awareness campaign.

Also, this Tuesday we presented a request for information to the Secretary of Environment and Climate Change of the province, requesting updated information about the operation of the plant, the amount and condition of the sewage liquids upon entry and exit, as well as the treatment that they are made. At the same time, a report was required on the status and progress of the plant expansion works begun in 2017.

The contamination problem of the Bajo Grande plant is long-standing. Despite the complaints, complaints from NGOs and affected communities, technical reports and analyzes that account for the progressive deterioration of the Suquía River, and even a sentence of 2004 – with repeated requests for execution – which obliges the Municipality of Córdoba to minimize and mitigate environmental impacts in the area, the situation is only getting worse for the Suquía River and the populated areas that live downstream of the plant.

We hope that both the municipal and provincial authorities fulfill their duty to provide the required information in a timely manner, in order to ensure true access to public environmental information of citizens, as well as transparency and publicity of government actions.

More information


María Pérez Alsina –

On March 4, representatives of 24 countries of Latin America and the Caribbean meeting in San Jose, Costa Rica, adopted the first binding regional agreement to protect the rights of access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental issues The agreement adopted the character of binding, becoming an unprecedented legal instrument for the region. It was approved without reservation of the States and will require 11 ratifications for its entry into force.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

At the end of the Ninth Meeting of the Negotiating Committee of the Regional Agreement on Principle 10, government delegates, together with representatives of the public and experts from international organizations, agreed on the final text of the agreement. This text was negotiated since 2014, and it also enshrined the protection of human rights defenders in environmental matters.

A little history…

In June 2012, in the framework of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio + 20, ten countries signed the Declaration on the application of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (the Declaration). This, recognized that the rights of access to information, participation and justice in environmental matters are essential for the promotion of sustainable development, democracy and a healthy environment. In addition, the Declaration committed signatories to explore the viability of a regional instrument to ensure the full implementation of access rights.

After two years of work, in November 2014 the signatory countries decided to start negotiating a Regional Agreement. A Negotiation Committee was created, which was formed by the signatory countries.

What is principle 10?

Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration seeks to ensure that everyone has access to information, participates in decision-making and accesses justice in environmental matters. This, in order to guarantee the right to a healthy and sustainable environment for present and future generations. The Declaration of Principle 10 is a major step forward in the region for stronger environmental governance.

Negotiations for the Agreement

The purpose of the negotiations for the Agreement was to deepen Latin American democracies, social cohesion, generate confidence in the decisions adopted, eliminate asymmetries and prevent socio-environmental conflicts. The aspiration of this treaty was to achieve a redefinition in the traditional relations of the State, the market and societies. It also sought to contribute to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

In 2015, with the first meeting of the Negotiating Committee for the Agreement, and after eight subsequent meetings; the representatives of the nations of Latin America managed to conclude the definitive text of the treaty that will adopt a binding character. The process of hard government work and civil society organizations, resulted in an instrument that improves the standards of access to information, participation and access to justice in environmental matters. The fact that it is binding speaks of a new level of commitment assumed by the governments of the region and guarantees the protection of environmental defenders.

Along the way to reach the Regional Agreement, civil society played a very important role in terms of recommendations for the final text. It was before the eighth meeting (held at the end of 2017), when the civil society organizations expressed their concern about the progress of the negotiations and demanded from the governments a greater commitment to effectively guarantee the rights under discussion. The security situation for environmental defenders became a turning point to demand that the agreement be transformed into a legally binding instrument capable of reversing this situation.

The ninth and last meeting…

As mentioned, the Ninth Meeting for the Negotiation of the Regional Agreement was the last and resulted in the adoption of a final text and in the realization of a binding instrument. In that sense, it became a tool at the regional level that will serve for the protection of environmental defenders and their rights. This is extremely important since one of the main causes of socio-environmental conflicts in Latin America and the Caribbean is the lack of environmental information. Likewise, one of the main consequences of these conflicts is violence, persecution and assassination of environmental defenders. This Agreement then comes to fulfill the first mandate of the negotiations: “Prevent socio-environmental conflicts”.

Other important elements to be included in the Agreement were highlighted before this meeting. One of them was to strengthen the definitions that were still pending such as rights of access, authority and fundamentally that of environmental defenders. Another necessary issue was to define what includes access to environmental information (included in article 2, Inc. c). It is important that the instrument include a broad definition with a list of elements that constitute this type of information (enshrined in Article 6 of the final text). Similarly, with the definition of people and / or groups in vulnerable situations (enshrined in Article 2, Inc. e of the final text). Finally, another relevant point was to include the participation of the public in the structure of what the implementation of the Agreement will be like the Conference of the Parties and the Facilitation and Follow-up Committee. This last element was reflected in article 15, urging the Conference of Parties to define the modalities of public participation (however, public participation is not included as the structure of the Conference). The text of the treaty states that the Agreement will be open for signature by all the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean at the United Nations Headquarters in New York from September 27, 2018 to September 26, 2020. Likewise, It will be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by the States that have signed it. The ratification of 11 nations will be needed for its entry into force.

The result of the negotiations will allow countries to commit themselves to implement this agreement in their respective territories in a concrete manner. With an agreement without the binding nature that obliges States to implement this Agreement, the rights of access to information, participation and justice would not be assured with certainty.

We celebrate the evolution of this process, highlighting the importance of this agreement to achieve better and more solid democracies. Likewise, we consider that a large part of the environmental problems of the region (related to extractive industries and large infrastructure projects) may find a solution after the implementation of this Regional Agreement.

Más información


Agustina Palencia


María Pérez Alsina –

Agustina Palencia –

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


‘The open government honeymoon is over’. With that phrase, Nathaniel Heller, executive vice president of the OGP; He opened the days that took place at the Kirchner Cultural Center and sought to call for reflection on the effective application of the principles of the alliance.

Founded in 2011 from the initiative of the United States and Brazil in the General Assembly of the United Nations, the OGP has managed to nuclear to more than 70 nations. Until now, the alliance has become a repository of action plans and commitments of the various countries that make it up. The goals proposed by the States parties to this initiative have been aimed at improving standards of transparency, accountability and collaboration.

These principles proposed by the OGP, are no more than the original pillars of democracy. Open government is the ‘new’ paradigm that seeks to reformulate the role of the State with respect to citizenship. It seeks that institutions establish a ‘conversation’ with the populations, to make them participants in the processes of creation, execution and control of public policies.

Until 2017, most of the commitments in the action plans corresponded to actions to release data and access public information without the need to emphasize many issues that could be considered controversial (environment, health, gender, extractive industries, natural resources, financing of political parties, among others). However, this Regional Meeting aimed to highlight good practices regarding citizen participation, accountability and transparency applied precisely to these areas that have lately been in the eye of the storm of international politics. The inaugural phrase of this event (cited above) aimed to highlight the need for the OGP to go one step further and be able to tangibly demonstrate how its principles can effectively improve people’s lives.

So far, the efforts of the OGP States have sweetened the ears of those of us who share their principles. But it is necessary that there are specific actions aimed at shaping a new type of State. The problem with the AGA has been that so far it has placed too much emphasis on the National Executive Powers (PEN) and little on the other powers and even on the subnational governments. The structure of OGP until 2016 only managed to support PEN initiatives.

After the launch of the pilot program for subnational governments in 2016 and the incorporation of a greater number of commitments by the legislative and judicial branches in several countries; it can be said that OGP is expanding its spectrum. However, there is still much to be done to achieve a true institutionalization of this new culture of openness. The second problem with the alliance is that in most of the member countries, the entity at the institutional level responsible for carrying out the relationship with OGP, is not part of the national organizational structure and lacks its own budget. This situation leads us to think that OGP is an initiative that today is subject to political fluctuations and management priorities. It is not a culture that translates into the planning of all public policies of the States.

Throughout the event, the urgency of moving from a paradigm of ‘open government’ to that of an ‘open state’ that expands the policies of transparency and accountability was stressed. This, in a vertical way towards subnational and local governments; and horizontally towards the legislative and judicial powers. Likewise, the need to efficiently and effectively involve the involvement of civil society in the processes of co-creation and co-implementation was highlighted. Both in the national action plans, and in public policies in general.

The paradigm of open government seems to be implemented at different speeds throughout the world, and within each State as well. Argentina, is a case witness of this situation. Many open government initiatives can be collected throughout the country; However, this develops in a very dissimilar way. While provinces such as Córdoba, Buenos Aires and Santa Fe have set up specific government agencies to advance open government policies; Provinces such as Santa Cruz and Río Negro do not have this type of institutionalization of the paradigm. The same happens at the municipal level.

This situation hinders the articulation between the different governmental levels, and therefore the application of the principles of open government is deficient. Local governments have become a fundamental piece for the effective concretion of transparency, accountability and participation. The proximity of local administrations with citizens is the key that gives these governments this importance for the implementation of this culture of openness. The Regional Meeting highlighted this important role and provided the space for the knowledge of good practices already implemented at the local level.

On the other hand, the participation of FUNDEPS was signated to the presentation in a panel about infrastructure projects and public works. The objective was to highlight some cases of large infrastructure projects in the Province of Córdoba, in which standards of transparency, accountability and participation were not applied. During the exhibition, we brought up the cases of the expansion of the sewage treatment plant (WWTP), the construction of the trunk gas pipelines and the development of the Carlos Paz Environmental Center. The panel also had the presence of the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN), a representative of the public procurement sector of Chile and a representative of the Initiative for Transparency in Construction (CoST). The purpose of the session was to reflect on the importance of defining better standards of transparency and citizen participation in this type of project.

This panel, in particular, was one of many that sought to demonstrate the need to apply open government standards on specific issues. Specifically, in those issues that today are particularly sensitive for some States (climate change, natural resources, budget, extractive industries, among others). The OGP is born to achieve a modification in the institutions, in such a way that the confidence of the citizens can be recovered. For this, it is essential that citizens can see that their lives are modified in a positive way based on the application of these principles. In this regard, it becomes more than necessary that the open government paradigm can be expanded to all branches and levels of government. It is about moving from an open government to an open state.


“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


During the month of November, from the Directorate of Open Government of the province of Córdoba invited to test the statistical portal, civil society organizations that are part of the provincial table to follow the goal of OGP. Subsequently, the official launch of the new platform was made. This effectively evidences the new imprint that is being adopted by the General Secretariat of the Interior. The participation of civil society organizations demonstrates that the provincial government has begun to build an active data community.

The portal now available has information from the old page of the Statistics and Census Bureau. The new interface, however, is much friendlier for the user and has new sections. It is an advance in terms of open government on the part of the Province. The new portal has a section of ‘Open Data’, one of ‘Visualizations’ and one of ‘Publications’.

By browsing the page you will find detailed socio-economic information about the Province and each department and municipality. In the section ‘Conocé Córdoba’ you can access the largest amount of social statistical information. In the ‘Open Data’ section there are more than 600 datasets and several of them are in open and reusable formats.

The innovation can be found in the ‘Visualizations’ and ‘Publications’ sections. While most data portals do not include these types of sections, these are fundamental when it comes to bringing data to the public. Usually, data in open formats is difficult to read and understand. For this, the visualizations organize the information and present it in a dynamic and fluid way. In particular, these visualizations contained in the new portal are interactive and the user can modify and filter the information in such a way that customized visualizations can be created.

A step further is the ‘Publications’ section. It is a space in which some datasets are explained. This type of resource brings the information closer to the citizen and allows a full understanding of the data.

We consider positive the initiative to modernize the platform and recognize as fundamental resources that were incorporated and that ultimately allow better access to public information on the part of citizens. Likewise, we celebrate that it was an inclusive process in which civil society organizations were involved.


“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


The undersigned organizations in the framework of the questioned process of designation of the Ombudsman of the Nation, and taking into account the following points:

– That citizen participation is a human right, and an instrument for the adoption of better public policies.

– That it is not a matter of electing a People’s Defender, but rather of appointing the best possible Ombudsman.

– That eight (8) years ago civil society organizations have been demanding not only the selection of an Ombudsman, but the adoption of a participatory and transparent process for that purpose.

– That citizen participation can not be the victim of a hurried selection process.

– That the absence of an explicit mechanism by which a process of citizen participation is established does not mean that the bicameral commission can not adopt a procedure for that purpose.

– That the express acceptance of candidates for the postulation, made by the Bicameral Committee of the Ombudsman without any citizen participation or any argument – more than political consensus – is an insurmountable antecedent of lack of suitability.

– That the procedure adopted for the selection of the Ombudsman ignores the “Principles relating to the status of national institutions” (Paris Principles), which represent the minimum international standards for the establishment of National Human Rights Institutions (INDH), as well as the General Comments of the Accreditation Sub-Committee.

– And finally, regarding the procedure for appointing the Ombudsman, the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) recommended -on several occasions- “to ensure the formalization of a clear and transparent selection and appointment process, and participatory (…) that includes wide dissemination of vacancies; maximize the number of potential candidates from a wide range of social groups; promote broad consultation and participation in the application, selection and designation process; evaluate candidates based on predetermined, objective and public domain criteria; select members to serve with their own individual capacity and not on behalf of the organization they represent.”


Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ)

Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales

Fundación Directorio Legislativo

Fundación Poder Ciudadano

Aldeas Infantiles SOS

Asociación Civil Capibara. Naturaleza, Derecho y Sociedad

Banco de Bosques

Centro Latinoamericano de Derechos Humanos (CLADH)

Comisión Argentina para Refugiados y Migrantes (CAREF)

Democracia en Red

Equipo Latinoamericano de Justicia y Género (ELA)

Foro de Periodismo Argentino (FOPEA)

Fundación Conocimiento Abierto

Fundación Ciudad

Fundación Huésped

Fundación para el Desarrollo de Políticas Sustentables (FUNDEPS)

Fundación para el Estudio e Investigación de la Mujer (FEIM)

Fundación Sur

Fundación Vía Libre

Instituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales y Sociales (INECIP)

Laboratorio de Políticas Públicas

Salta Transparente


“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


In the absence of answers, the claim was brought to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and to the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations, and both agencies urged the Argentine State to appoint the Ombudsman promptly. It should be noted that it is a key institution for the defense of human rights.

In accordance with the principles of the inter-American human rights system, States undertake to adopt legislative or other measures that are necessary to give effect to the rights and freedoms recognized in the American Convention on Human Rights. Among the measures mentioned, there are those tending to effect the establishment and regular operation of the Ombudsman’s Office.

The Ombudsman has basically two functions: 1) Defense and protection of the rights of the people before acts or omissions of the public administration; and 2) Control of the exercise of public administrative functions. However, this definition of the Defender may become limited since it does not contemplate its more procedural and human dimension: the idea and aspiration to create an entity capable of being receptive to the needs of the population. The Ombudsman’s Office plays a fundamental role not only in the protection of human rights and control of the exercise of public functions, but also as a key institution in direct communication between the State and individuals.

During the month of August 2017, 55 civil society organizations again called for the end of this situation and the designation of the Ombudsman. The complaint also included a proposal for the appointment that included both legal and constitutional requirements, as well as suggestions for the selection process. It was requested that the necessary measures be adopted so that the Bicameral Ombudsman’s Commission immediately begins the appointment procedure, which ensures 1) transparency and citizen participation in the process and 2) the suitability of the candidates.

The selection process of the Defender must follow rigorous criteria that guarantee the moral suitability and technical suitability. The moral suitability in this case not only refers to the absence of disciplinary offenses or conduct contrary to public ethics; but it refers to the need to prove a true commitment to human rights. The technical suitability, on the other hand, has to do essentially with the knowledge about the problems of Human Rights and the means to remedy them.

Another point to highlight in how the designation of the Ombudsman should be carried out, has to do with the independence of criteria. The CN in its article 86 emphasizes the autonomous character of the figure of the Defender and the independence of criteria. This refers to the non-partisanship of the figure and the absence of economic ties or interest that may interfere with the activities of the Ombudsman.

These selection criteria must be accompanied by a transparent and participatory procedure governed by publicity and openness in all stages of the process. The presentation made by the civil society detailed the proposal for the implementation of a selection process that should include: 1) Proposal of the candidates, 2) Publication of background, 3) Observations, challenges and questions, 4) Written responses from the candidates , 5) Public hearing before the bicameral commission, 6) Observations, 7) Decision of the bicameral commission.

This organ since 2009 lacks real leadership and since then it is operating under interim mandates because Congress has not yet agreed on the appointment of a director. Since 2015, undersecretary-general Juan José Böckel has been in charge of this unit, a man who answers the former intervener of that entity, the deputy governor of Jujuy, Carlos Haquim. Currently, the Ombudsman’s Office has been immersed in corruption cases after anonymous reports of irregularities in the organization.

According to reports, on Wednesday, November 8, the Bicameral Commission of the Ombudsman would sign the proposal of three candidates to the Ombudsman, with a view to having the Chambers designate it before the end of the year. This has been done without convoking the civil society and if this agreement were reached without the participation of the citizens in the formation of the shortlist, it will affect the proper institutional functioning of the Ombudsman, once their new holder is designated. .

The importance of the prompt designation of the Ombudsman is that it is one of the agencies in charge of the horizontal control of the State (called Horizontal Accountability). It is about the control exercised by the same institutions over the acts and / or omissions emanating from the State. In this sense, it is essential that the mechanisms that guarantee horizontal accountability work correctly. We join the claim of civil society for the prompt appointment of the Ombudsman.

More information

– Without citizen participation, the Ombudsman will not be for the People

– 55 organizations ask Congress for the designation of the Ombudsman

– Contributions for the regulation of the nomination process of the nation’s Ombudsman


“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


On September 15 we celebrate the International Day of Democracy. Democracy is both a process and a goal, and only with the full participation and support of national governing bodies, civil society and individuals can the ideal of democracy become reality to be enjoyed by all, everywhere.

The celebration and commemoration of this day is presented as an opportunity to reflect on the state of democracies in the world. Precisely, international days seek to raise awareness, raise awareness, signal that there is an unresolved problem, an important and pending issue in societies. In this case, the day of democracy seeks to remember how relevant it is to ensure that states establish healthy regimes in which human rights find their place and are fully guaranteed and respected.

The celebration of this date was due to the fact that the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) in its resolution A / 62/7 (2007) encouraged governments to strengthen national programs dedicated to promoting and consolidating democracy.

This date was first held in 2008. The date was chosen because it was precisely on 15 September 1997 that the world parliamentary organization “Inter-Parliamentary Union” adopted a Universal Declaration on Democracy which reaffirms its principles and the elements and practices necessary for a democratic government.

The world is currently attending a time when it is necessary to renew votes regarding democratic principles. Movements like the Alliance for Open Government specifically seek to aggiornar democratic principles, ensuring that they guarantee full citizen participation and respect for human rights.




Agustina Palencia,

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


On Monday, August 7, we attended the public hearing convened by Federal Court No. 3 by Dr. Hugo Vaca Narvaja in the amparo promoted by neighbors Barrio Ne Antonio and Inaudi against the Ministry of Energy and Mining of the Nation And the company Porta Hnos. They had the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Public Prosecutor’s Office representing the interests of children and the State Attorney’s Office.

The amparo involving more than 25 neighbors and residents of San Antonio and other people of the Citizens’ Assembly “NEIGHBORHOODS IN DEFENSE OF A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT – VUDAS” was filed against the Ministry of Energy and Mining of the Nation Of Hydrocarbon Resources) requesting the closure and final closure of the bioethanol plant of Porta Hnos SA They base their claim by stating that the company does not have the legal authorization to prepare biofuel (bioethanol) which should have been granted by the said secretariat and for not having concluded, prior to its entry into operation, the Environmental Impact Assessment process. Subsidiarily, amparists request the cessation of environmental pollution that the activity produces and irreparably affects the environment and the health of neighbors.

It is inexplicable the absence by the State in its different levels of government: national, provincial and municipal, both at the time of urban planning, to ensure compliance with current environmental standards and at the public hearing to listen to the parties and express Your position. But more inexplicable is that it was not the first time. At the end of April of 2015 the local group came to be chained in the headquarters of the Municipality of Cordova to obtain an audience with the intendant Ramón Mestre. They were forced to extreme acts to fulfill their right to be heard and to go to the authorities. Again an absent state.

But not everything has been unfortunate. We had the opportunity to accompany neighbors in this unprecedented audience for Cordoba. Initially, a conciliation hearing was scheduled under the federal law with the characteristic that it was going to be public. The judge then changed the character of the hearing to an information type imitating the proceedings of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in the “Mendoza” case on environmental pollution of the Matanza – Riachuelo River. Having even arranged a mechanism for the participation of third persons, from FUNDEPS we register to take the floor. Finally, between roosters and midnight the judge again changed the character of the hearing to a conciliation so we could only participate as a public.

We emphasize the need to guarantee the right to information, participation and dialogue between the parties involved with the authorities with competence in urban planning, environmental territorial management, control of anthropic activities, setting and control of standards and norms. We also emphasize the importance of taking into account the hazards of this type of industry in light of the precautionary principle and prevention that governs environmental matters (article 4 LGA), because it is located in a residential neighborhood.

At the hearing, where the judge had broad powers to direct it, neighbors had the opportunity to tell the before and after that involved the installation and expansion of the company Porta Hnos and the consequences it brought in its health and quality of life. Then the lawyers, the Public Ministry of Defense and the Prosecutor’s Office were given the floor for fifteen minutes. We consider this instance to be very valuable as it strengthens transparency, citizen participation and public dissemination of this socio-environmental conflict antecedent to Cordoba as the possibility given by the Court to the neighbors.

We believe that it is important to emphasize in these cases the role of the judges in order to guarantee the fundamental rights of present generations and future generations. This is an ideal case to carry out a model of dialogic justice, to seek a structural solution to the conflict, through. The court has the opportunity to establish clear judicial guidelines that address the protection of fundamental rights, such as the human right to a healthy environment, to the health and life of the neighbors of Barrio San Antonio and Inaudi. We trust that this instance allows the claim of neighbors to be effectively heard and that the State, at its different levels, recognize, investigate and solve a complex socio-environmental situation.

Victoria Gerbaldo, <>
Juan Carballo, <>

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


We note with concern the urgency and selectivity with which we are dealing with the problematic bill submitted by the National Executive Branch on June 12 under number 0010/PE/2017. This project, aiming to regulate religious freedom, incorporates the questionable figure of the institutional conscientious objection and generates mechanisms of institutional violence and violation of human rights.

This proposal not only jeopardizes the legitimacy of the legal system by proposing as a rule the possibility of excepting compliance with the law, but also seriously compromises the international obligations assumed by the Argentine State. This is so insofar as there is a great potential to obstruct the fulfillment and guarantee of many human rights, such as health, identity, non-discrimination and life free of violence, as well as to affect vulnerable groups such as children and adolescents , And people with disabilities.

Although the draft mentions several human rights treaties, it is widely misunderstood in their interpretation, in view of the many jurisprudential precedents given by our country’s courts in this area, as well as the recommendations of the corresponding human rights committees. In this way, it aims to erect as a guarantor standard, but in its drafting institutes mechanisms that preclude access to basic rights that must be guaranteed by the State.

Institutional conscientious objection, in practice, makes it possible to carry out generalized discriminatory acts against certain groups, historically relegated. Imagine a person who is in a position to request surgical intervention for genital reassignment, before institutions that by religious belief may violate their right to identity and psychophysical health in an institutionalized way.

The presumption of good faith granted by the project to the person exercising the conscientious objection reverses the burden of proof to the detriment of citizenship, making each person to judge each case, since the final interpretation of the constitutionality corresponds to the Power Judicial. This would generate serious mechanisms of institutional violence, and our State has acquired international commitments for the purpose of eradicating such violence. Let us not forget: in what democratic state can a person evade compliance with the law because his faith dictates it?

It also legitimizes the risk of children and adolescents, as well as persons with disabilities, when it enables its representatives to exercise conscientious objection on their behalf. This could lead to denial of certain medical treatments by representation, which has been widely rejected by our courts.

Likewise, in order to safeguard the rights of non-Catholic religious communities, churches and other denominations, it does not regressively recognize sexual and non-reproductive rights and international standards in this regard. In this regard, it should be recalled that conscientious objection is not recognized as a human right, and that the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (General Comment No. 22 March 2016) stated that, should States regulate it , This must be done in a way that does not impact on access to sexual and reproductive health. This recommendation is not observed in the project, much less in the hermetic treatment that is being given.

On the other hand, and what is not less, it is possible to rescue that by definition legal persons and / or entities do not possess the consciousness or subjectivity that seeks to protect the notion of conscientious objection. What religion or belief can a legal entity claim?

A rule that seeks to incorporate, in a generalized, discretionary and presumptive manner, the exception to the fulfillment of legal obligations, seriously compromises legal certainty, the bases of our rule of law, and the exercise and guarantee of human rights. Religious freedom is already guaranteed by our National Constitution, and by human rights treaties with constitutional hierarchy. This bill only undermines its exercise, and in turn implies an express and serious acceptance that not all of us have the same duty of obedience before the law.

The pronouncement of the organizations

We adhere to the rejection letter to Bill 0010 / PE / 2017, prepared by the Abogadxs National Alliance for Women’s Human Rights, which is joined by more than 100 recognized organizations and institutions from all over the country, and more than 400 experts and law specialists.

This letter will be presented to the Commissions for Foreign Affairs and Worship, Penal Legislation and Budget and Finance, of the Chamber of Deputies of the National Congress, in order to make known the institutional gravity that matters the consideration of this project, and the concern for its Selective treatment.


María Julieta Cena

More information

Virginia Pedraza –

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”


The recent resolution officially ruled by the federal judge with electoral competence in Santa Fe, Reinaldo Rubén Rodríguez, who is challenging the list of 15 national deputy candidates, presented by the Ciudad Futura political space, is in debate. The magistrate ordered that Law 24,012 guaranteed equality of opportunity and treatment for women, which also has to be guaranteed for men. This statement generates an immediate question: What is the lack of access opportunities that men have in political spaces, in relation to women?

Unfortunately, in the wake of the interpretation of our Constitution, and in particular Art. 37, the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) continue to be ignored. English), which enjoys a constitutional hierarchy and must be mandatory as a current and complementary norm of our Charter.

Article 4 (1) of the CEDAW states: “The adoption by States Parties of temporary special measures to accelerate de facto equality between men and women shall not be considered discrimination in the manner defined in the Convention. This Convention shall not, however, entail, as a consequence, the maintenance of unequal or separate standards; These measures shall cease when the objectives of equality of opportunity and treatment have been achieved”.

Female quota laws are nothing more than these “special temporary measures” established in this body of legislation, which must cease when the objectives of equality of opportunity and treatment have been achieved. From there comes the question: Have we already achieved such equality between men and women?

Recently, after the ruling in Santa Fe, some newspaper articles have branded Law No. 24,012 as “discriminatory for men.” But, although women are more than half the population, how is it possible that in no space for decision-making in our country we have reached 50% representation?

Gender inequality is manifest in all spaces, and the political is clearly included. Even more so when speeches that de-legitimize quota laws are tirelessly reproduced. Mandatory female representation by quota is the first step to ensure equal opportunities. Political parties must find female representatives, with sufficient qualifications and qualifications to fill these representative positions, so that they truly speak for women who are part of such spaces.

It is not the quota laws that compel the parties to make the candidates the “wives of” or “figures of the spectacle or sport without vocation for politics and fictional candidates or testimonials who “smiles smiling”, as some notes Journalism. It is the machista mechanisms themselves that do not recognize women with sufficient autonomy and merit, as apt to occupy such positions of fundamental democratic importance.
It remains difficult to understand the debate around quota laws, when no alternative proposals have been heard or read that guarantee real spaces for women, who have historically been relegated to the private, far from politics. Let us not forget that it was only 69 years ago that women have acceded to the right to vote, and that Law 24,012 was enacted only in 1991.

Before the validity of the Act on Women, the women representatives of their parties in Congress did not exceed 6% of the total number of seats. After its promulgation, in 2005, the female participation reached 36% in the Chamber of Deputies and 42% in the Senate. At present, women occupy 41.7% in the Senate and 38.5% in Deputies.

The quota laws are necessary, and society and the Argentine political community remain indebted to democracy, because parity is not yet real. Let us not go back, and move forward to make room for equal opportunities and treatment between women and men.

Antes de la vigencia de la Ley de Cupo Femenino, las mujeres representantes de sus partidos en el Congreso no superaban el 6% del total de las bancas. Luego de su promulgación, en el año 2005, la participación femenina alcanzó el 36% en la Cámara de Diputados y el 42% en el Senado. En la actualidad, las mujeres ocupan el 41,7% en la Cámara de Senadores y el 38,5% en Diputados.

The quota laws are necessary, and society and the Argentine political community remain indebted to democracy, because parity is not yet real. Let us not go back, and move forward to make room for equal opportunities and treatment between women and men.


Journalists and women politicians, a boom in list building. Editorial. Diario Clarin. Buenos Aires, 25/06/2017.

– Female quotas are not necessary. Editorial. Diario La Nacion. Buenos Aires, 09/07/2017.

Gabriel Sued. Women unite in Congress for an increase in the female quota. Diario La Nación, Buenos Aires, 16/08/2016.

Marcela Ríos Tobar. Woman and politics. The impact of gender quotas in Latin America. Catalonia. Santiago, Chile, 2008.

More information

Virginia Pedraza –

During the month of December 2016, the Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies decided to carry out a survey process in the neighborhood of Chacras de la Merced, in order to obtain accurate information about the state of situation of the community there.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”

Since 2015, FUNDEPS has been working with the recently mentioned neighborhood of the City of Cordoba, in relation to the problems of the sewage treatment plant (WWTP). The proven malfunction of the plant, located in the area since 1984, has caused numerous problems in the nearby population, as well as in the ecosystem there.

The purpose of this survey process was to be able to discover the perception of the neighbors of the neighborhood with respect to the plant, as well as of other problems that they could identify as an emergency. The instrument used was intended to compile the perception of the community of Chacras de la Merced about the operation of the sewage treatment plant, the environmental situation of the area, the performance of the government authorities towards the neighborhood and its interest Engage in control activities.

In this sense, within the results obtained, below are presented those of greater relevance.

An 83% (44 families) does not feel calm with the environmental situation of the district Chacras de la Merced.

Five issues were mentioned and respondents were asked to prioritize among themselves, establishing from 1 to 5 the urgency with which they believed they should be addressed by government authorities. Of the total families surveyed, 34 (64%) of them gave the number 1 priority and urgency to the pollution caused by the sewage treatment plant.

The respondents were then asked whether or not they knew the work that EDAR does, and 58.8% said they did not know with certainty the work and operation of the WWTP. 50.9% said he was very badly informed about the issues that relate to the operation of the plant. Consistent with this, 79.2% of neighbors said they do not trust the information provided by the municipality of Cordoba on the operation of the plant.

Notwithstanding the lack of knowledge, 86% consider that the plant is not functioning properly; And opined in reference to the factor considered to cause malfunction. 37.2% of the respondents said that the plant does not work properly due to lack of municipal controls that verify the correct functioning. Likewise, 46.5% consider that the malfunction of the plant causes the immediate contamination of the river.

He wondered about the confidence that respondents had in certain institutions and organizations. Entrepreneurs, the provincial government, the municipal government, the police, the legislature, the judiciary, political parties, trade unions and the national government receive nothing from the neighbors of Chacras de la Merced. Private and public universities; Environmental organizations, social organizations, religious institutions, and the media are receptive to the trust of neighbors. The neighbors opined, undoubtedly with 77% (41 families), who do not trust EDAR.

It is important to note that 76.9% of the neighbors do not have / had information about the bidding process carried out by the province for the expansion of the sewage treatment plant. Likewise, with regard to the opinion about the expansion of the plant, it is surprising that despite the declared distrust of the authorities and the information they provide; 58.5% of the residents are confident that the work will improve the quality of life of the community.

88.7% of the respondents believe that they should (people from the neighborhood with civil society organizations) participate in monitoring spaces to the actions of the state in the area of ​​environmental control. It was also consulted about the inclination towards participation in monitoring spaces of the actions of the municipality and the province in the process of construction of the new plant. 56.6% expressed that they would be willing to participate in these spaces if they arose.

The survey also aimed to know about the health history of the neighbors, consulting about symptoms and diseases they have had, their frequency, the diagnosis provided and the treatment indicated. In this regard, 69% said they had suffered from one of the listed symptoms.

The results of the survey process show that the community of Chacras de la Merced is in a serious situation of vulnerability due to the confluence of numerous factors that lead to the violation of their most basic rights. Álida Weht, director of the Las Omas grassroots organization whose objective is to improve the quality of life of the neighbors, has stated that: “the results constitute the visibility of a pollution situation that dates back several decades and a community Which has been immersed in an immediacy of problems for the same time.

In the context of the recent events related to the overturning of the Suquía River, both from company waste and from raw sewage, it is necessary to highlight the emergency in which the Chacras de la Merced neighborhood is located.

Full survey report

More information


Agustina Palencia –