With an extraordinary organization in all parts of the country, and within the framework of an international movement, women are once again demanding equality.

“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 women’s day in 2017, a mobilization was carried out in more than 35 countries to denounce the historical inequality of women in society and its multiple consequences: from sexist violence -and its most extreme expression, femicides- to feminization of poverty, economic violence, domestic work and unpaid care, wage gap in relation to male salaries, job insecurity, universal vacancies in kindergartens, extension of maternity and paternity leave, salaries for victims of gender violence, equal salary for equal work, reopening of the moratorium for housewives, among other claims.

This year, the mobilization multiplied, and the organizations and movements and unions of all the places of the country reconvene under the same banner. Thousands of people are gathering in the Organizational Assemblies of the International Stop of women, trans, lesbians and of all feminized identities, and we call for various measures, from unemployment to marches, interventions, digital campaigns, etc.

The deployment of energies occurs throughout Latin America, and the claims are adjusted to the most urgent needs of each place, making visible the diversity of our continent.

Undoubtedly, the collective Ni Una Menos, present in all provinces and almost all cities in the country, is the space that brings together people who want to make visible again the struggle for the rights to equality and a life free of violence. From these spaces are built the alliances and the links of a historical and tireless struggle that grows every day.

From FUNDEPS we stop all the identities that are part of our organization. We return to the need to rethink our relationships, our policies and our socio-cultural reality. We accompany the fight, invite and adhere to the International Women’s Strike on March 8, 2018.

Contact

Virginia Pedraza, vir.pedraza@fundeps.org

After the election of the Carlos Paz Awards 2018, the speaker Carlos Caserta made a series of homophobic, discriminating and derogatory comments against Florencia de la V and the trans community. It was denounced by social organizations, criticized in the media and INADI declared its repudiation.

“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 speaker Carlos Caserta, in his program on FM 100, criticized the Carlos Paz Awards for recognizing the actress and comedian Florencia de la V, for his performance in the play “Explosivos”.

In his sayings he said: “Choose a ‘trava’ as a prominent female figure … Excuse me, you, but they are sick in the head (…) Honestly, I do not mean it, it’s not a woman! You have to respect the woman Fuck! How can it be that a job is more important than a woman? And the women, above, do not do anything, they take it with grace, they are shitting the clients, the prizes. you carry, or homosexuals.”

The aberrant manifestations of Caserta are framed in a violent practice, in flagrant detriment of the rights of the LGTTTBIQ collective, which foment discrimination, inequality and hatred. In these cases it is essential to remember the “Guide for the journalistic treatment responsible for gender identities, sexual orientation and intersexuality“, published by the Ombudsman’s Office, which recommends, among others: “Respect the principle of self-determination of sexual identities and orientations and promote media discourses that avoid judging or discrediting the autonomy of people to define themselves.

On the other hand, the sayings of this man promote a dichotomous vision of gender and sexuality, making a focus on compulsory heterosexuality as the only legitimate model of bodies, identities, relationships and families.

Many organizations make complaints through the corresponding channels, which are responsible for ensuring the rights of audiences, such as the Ombudsman’s Office, ENACOM, INADI, and INAM.

The response of INADI was swift and concrete in its rejection of the statements of Caserta, reaffirming that “these manifestations take on another dimension and impact when they are disseminated in the mass media,” which is why it invites awareness-raising among communicators to the microphone.

This type of conduct by communication professionals is plausible for sanctions and is in flagrant violation of our national regulations, as well as the Human Rights Treaties, which are part of our legal system.

It should not be forgotten that, according to the Audiovisual Communication Services Law No. 26,522, it establishes in article 70: “The programming of the services provided in this law shall avoid content that promotes or incites discriminatory treatment based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation (…) or that undermine human dignity or induce behaviors that are harmful to the environment or to the health of people and the integrity of children or adolescents.”

On the other hand, the Gender Identity Law N ° 26.743, in its article 1:

Everyone has the right:

a) To the recognition of their gender identity;
b) The free development of their person according to their gender identity;
c) To be treated according to their gender identity and, in particular, to be identified in that way in the instruments that accredit their identity with respect to the name/s of pile, image and sex with which it is registered there.”

We applaud the immediate reaction of INADI, and the follow-up of the other competent organs of the State, in the fulfillment of its functions, and in guarantee to the rights that protect our laws. It is essential to understand that the media are creators of opinion and that this entails a great responsibility to those who create and reproduce the contents, to promote equality and respect for rights, in pursuit of a more just and equitable society.

Contact

Virginia Pedraza, vir.pedraza@fundeps.org

Following a request made by the State of Colombia on March 14, 2016, for the first time the Inter-American Court developed the content of the right to a healthy environment in its Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 on “Environment and Human Rights”, notified on February 7.

“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 this document the Court recognized “the undeniable relationship between the protection of the environment and the realization of other human rights“, highlighting the interdependence and indivisibility that exists between human rights, the environment and sustainable development. Therefore, it understands that all rights are vulnerable to environmental degradation, and its full enjoyment depends on an appropriate environment.

In the inter-American human rights system, the right to a healthy environment is expressly enshrined in Article 11 of the Protocol of San Salvador, which establishes the right of everyone to live in a healthy environment and to have basic public services, and the consequent obligation of the States to promote the protection, preservation and improvement of the environment.

In addition, this right is also considered included among the economic, social and cultural rights protected by Article 26 of the American Convention.

The Court clarified that “the human right to a healthy environment has been understood as a right with both individual and collective connotations. In its collective dimension, [..] constitutes a universal interest, which is due both to present and future generations. However, […] it also has an individual dimension, insofar as its violation can have direct or indirect repercussions on people due to its connection with other rights, such as the right to health, personal integrity or life, among others. The degradation of the environment can cause irreparable damage to human beings, so a healthy environment is a fundamental right for the existence of humanity.

The Advisory Opinion also determined the state obligations for the protection of the environment.

With respect to jurisdiction, States must respect and guarantee the human rights of all people and this may mean, depending on the case in particular and exceptionally, situations that go beyond their territorial limits. In the same sense, States have an obligation to avoid transboundary damage.

In particular, in order to respect and guarantee the rights to life and integrity, it determined that States must comply with the following obligations and principles:

Obligation of prevention: means to prevent significant environmental damage, inside or outside its territory, which implies that they must regulate, supervise and supervise the activities under their jurisdiction, carry out environmental impact studies, establish contingency plans and mitigate the damage that has occurred;

Principle of precaution: States must act in accordance with the precautionary principle against possible serious or irreversible damage to the environment that affects the rights to life and personal integrity, even in the absence of scientific certainty;

Obligation of cooperation: involves cooperation with other States in good faith for protection against significant environmental damage. From this are derived:

  • The obligation to notify potentially affected States of possible significant environmental damage caused by activities carried out under their jurisdiction;
  • The duty to consult and negotiate with the potentially affected States;
  • The duty to ensure the exchange of information between States;

Procedural Obligations: These are obligations that support a better formulation of environmental policies. Among them, States have to ensure:

  • Access to information: guarantee access to information on possible effects on the environment;
  • Public participation: guarantee the right to public participation of people, in making decisions and policies that may affect the environment.
  • Access to justice: guarantee access to justice, in relation to state obligations for the protection of the environment.

It is remarkable that the IACHR determines the content and scope of the procedural obligations, since they are in line with the provisions of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. This principle seeks to ensure that everyone has access to information, participates in decision-making and accesses justice in environmental matters, in order to guarantee the right to a healthy and sustainable environment for present and future generations. In this sense, FUNDEPS, together with several civil society organizations, actively participates in the negotiation process to obtain a Regional Agreement on Principle 10, considering that its concretion will allow strengthening capacities to deal with environmental challenges in the region. .

This Advisory Opinion arose because of Colombia’s concern regarding the “risk” that new major infrastructure projects will seriously affect the marine environment in the region. Everything provided by the Court will allow Colombia to continue advancing in the effective protection of the environment in the Greater Caribbean and the rights and interests of Colombians.

Beyond the effects that the document may have for the State that requested the Opinion, we understand that it constitutes a significant advance in terms of environmental protection for all American States, as it provides interpretative guidelines and completes the sense of the rights contained in the Covenant.

More information

See the full resolution

Author

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

During 2018, the private sector investment arm of the Inter-American Development Bank, BID
Invest, will review its institutional policy on access to information. It is a process that is expected
to improve its current policy, in order to effectively guarantee this right.

“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 investment arm of the private sector of the Inter-American Development Bank, BID Invest, will review its access to information policy during 2018. IDB Invest, is the entity in which the former Inter-American Investment Corporation (IIC) was transformed, as a result of the deepening that the IDB intends to carry out in its financing to the private sector.

The IIC (now BID Invest), like the other international financial institutions (IFIs), has operational policies that regulate the actions of the entity and present criteria for the granting of loans. The policies of access to information fall within the group of rules that define the actions of the institution. In particular, they claim the basic right of access to information that human beings have.

It is also important to mention the relevance that this right adopts in terms of development projects. For a true development to take place, it is necessary that those involved can be part of the information exchange process, and even more, that they can see their development priorities reflected throughout the project’s investment cycle. Only then, policies and projects will be able to provide real benefits to local communities.

In this regard, IFIs and their policies do not always account for the best standards and practices in terms of access to information. In a recent analysis, the organization International Accountability Project, found that the former Corporation failed greatly in guaranteeing this right. Numerous projects financed by this member of the IDB Group have not managed to make the affected communities have access to information or participation mechanisms. This situation has been fostered by a lax normative framework that does not guarantee access to this right in its fullness.

It is expected that in this 2018, with the change to BID Invest, the review of the policy will achieve maximum standards and good practices in what access to information is concerned. However, there are still few details about this process. The dates are not defined and it is not known if there will be any instance that allows participation and / or comments from civil society organizations. From FUNDEPS we will be following this process closely and getting involved in it.

More information

Author

Agustina Palencia

Contact

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

“A continuación, ofrecemos una versión de traducción de Google del artículo original en español. Esta traducción no es precisa pero sirve como una presentación general del artículo. Para más información, contactar directamente en inglés y/o español a la persona mencionada al final de este artículo con respecto a este tema “

From FUNDEPS we requested the participation as “Friend of the Court” and as private plaintiff in civil and criminal cases, respectively, initiated against a tannery that operated illegally at the height of km. 3 and 1/2 of the Chacra de la Merced road.

The past month of December formally presents an Amicus Curiae in the titled cars “Foundation of Third Generation C / Jolaga SRL – Environmental Protection”, (File 6229513) that is processed before the Civil and Commercial Court and the 45th Nomination of this city, for carry out the legal claims of the Court on the environmental damage caused by the contaminating activity of the JOLAGA tannery establishment SRL and the obligation that it has on it to recompose the environmental damage caused to the Suquía river.

The environmental protection initiated in February 2017 is aimed at the use of the activity developed for the establishment of wounds and the recomposition of the environmental damage caused.

All this is based on the illegal dumping of waste and residues in the Suquía River, on the Chacra de la Merced highway, km 3 1/2, by the establishment of JOLAGA SRL tanneries, owned by Jorge Ricardo Gawuryn and Ariel Gawuryn. , there has been a clear violation of the General Law of the Environment No. 25,675 and the Provincial Environmental Policy Law No. 10,208, which affects the rights of constitutional roots – right to a healthy environment – art. 41 CN -, right to health, right to life, not only of the population of the affected area but also of the entire community of the province of Córdoba.

In addition, due to the illegal and clandestine activity of possession, a criminal proceeding was initiated that culminated with the closure and with the imputation of tango owners JOLAGA SRL, Jorge Ricardo Gawuryn and Ariel Gawuryn, for the crime of continued environmental pollution, as co-authors, in accordance with the provisions of articles 55 of the Hazardous Waste Law 24,051, and 45 and 55 of the Criminal Code.

According to the investigation, the establishment operated almost ten years ago despite the complaining repetitions of the neighbors, throwing polluting substances into an open-air lagoon in the company’s facilities, and then they would have thrown them into an adjoining land, through of a pump drain. All these properties drain, by simple gravity, into the Suquía River.

As a foundation that promotes and encourages the realization of the right to a healthy and balanced environment, we consider that the contamination and environmental damage caused by the holders of privacy is a violation of these rights that we defend. For this reason, it requests the participation of a private prosecutor to promote the process and help the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the criminal investigation.

The neighborhood of Chacra de la Merced is located at the eastern end of the city of Córdoba, about 150 meters from Circunvalación Avenue and 200 meters from the Suquía River. For more than two decades it was part of the green belt of the city of Córdoba, today it has multiple sources of contamination. The worst thing is the Edar Bajo Grande wastewater treatment plant that has been dumping sewage into the Suquía River for years with poor treatment and even without treatment.

Other polluting industries are also sought, among them, such as JOLAGA SRL, quarries, lagoons produced by the extraction of aggregates converted into open air dumps, among others.

In this context almost 300 families live and the area has been declared in recent years in “environmental emergency” by the Municipality of Córdoba. However, there is no final non-compliance with the measures and actions provided, leaving the neighborhood forgotten in a “pollution river”.

In order to protect the fundamental rights of the residents of the neighborhood, a change of attitude was proposed to avoid impunity and the secrecy of this type of polluting activity. the mercy.

Source of images

La Voz del Interior

More Inforamtion

– Investigan contaminación con un carcinógeno en las cercanías de Suquía,  La Voz del Interior

–  Amicus curiae en causa “Fundación de Tercera Generación C / Jolaga SRL – Protección Ambiental”

– Demandante privado en causa “Acciones talladas arrojaron contaminantes cerca del río Suquía”

Contact

María Pérez Alsina – mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org

“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 year 2017 began with important and promising news for the Gasification Project of Localities of the Interior of the Province of Córdoba, better known by the people of Córdoba as the “main gas pipeline project”. During the first days of January, the Governor of Córdoba Juan Schiaretti and President Mauricio Macri were present at the inauguration of a Pressure Reducing Plant in La Calera, work carried out by the Brazilian company Odebrecht within the framework of the systems awarded to it after the public tender launched in 2015. The reduction plant constituted the first section inaugurated by the Córdoba-Gran Córdoba Ring System, comprised of 52 kilometers of gas pipelines. reinforcement, and that will benefit 300 thousand inhabitants of both Córdoba and La Calera and of Saldán, Villa Allende, Mendiolaza, Malagueño and Malvinas Argentinas, according to official information.

The presence of Macri at the inauguration of the work represented a gesture of political support for the Schiaretti government. Especially taking into account the strong questions and criticisms received by the provincial government for the involvement in this project of the Brazilian construction company Odebrecht, involved in a corruption scandal in Brazil and other Latin American countries, even in Argentina. Despite these questions, the Schiaretti government always defended the participation of the company by resorting to the debatable argument that the corruption events in which it is involved occurred between 2004 and 2013, while the tender in Córdoba was carried out only in 2015.

However, after a few days the project suffers a major setback: Schiaretti announces that, due to delays in obtaining loans from Chinese banks, 4 stretches of gas pipelines would be re-tendered to avoid postponing the start of the works in said sections, but in this case with the Province’s own financing. Recall that of the 10 trunk systems that were defined in 2015, 4 were awarded to Transitory Business Unions (UTEs) made up of Argentine and Chinese companies and financed by Chinese banks (ICBC and Bank of China); and the remaining 6 were awarded to Odebrecht (at first it was said that the Brazilian company would present its own financing for the start of the work, but finally this was not the case, making the province have to resort to indebtedness to start the works).

Thus, criticisms of the link with Odebrecht in the work will be added to questions about the delays in Chinese financing; the lack of relevant explanations regarding the reasons for the fall in financing; the need to re-tender the work and the decision of the provincial government to go back to the market to borrow to finance the work and even for the substantial increase in the cost of the work, which went from a budget of 8,600 million pesos in 2015 to 12,480 million pesos at the beginning of 2017 (an increase of 45% in almost two years).

After a new call for bids in February, in March the works of the four aforementioned systems were re-awarded to the same UTEs that had won in the first tender. In turn, the government issued a new batch of public securities for 460 million dollars to finance the start of works in the 4 tranches of the project, with the financial agent of Banco de Córdoba (Bancor).

Although in that same month of March advances were announced in the negotiations with the Chinese banks to finish making the committed credits for the work, surprisingly on April 21 the Governor Schiaretti announced the definitive fall of the Chinese financing and the signing of a decree that rendered ineffective the adjudication of the works of the 4 corresponding trunk systems. While Schiaretti himself blamed the Chinese banks for the fall in funding, arguing that they raised conditions “leonine, unacceptable to Cordoba and the national government,” the fact is that the government never made clear the true reasons and reasons that led to the fall of Chinese financing.

In this way, the government of Córdoba decided to launch a new tender for 437 million dollars for the construction of the 4 gas pipeline systems, which now in the new call would become 8 systems (in addition to the 6 remaining systems already awarded to Odebrecht ) and whose financing would come from the same province. In this case, the allocation of the new systems fell to national companies.

In early May, and despite criticism from the opposition, the provincial legislature approves a bill that enables new changes in the pipeline project: the negotiations with Chinese banks to finance 4 of the trunk systems are terminated, and it is approved that it is now the provincial government itself that must obtain the totality of the funds to complete the work (ratifying in this way the authorization granted by law 10,339 that enabled operations to take public credit to carry out the works). Just a few days later, the government made official through a decree published in the Official Gazette, a new debt collection for 450 million dollars to finance the work. By the end of June, Schiaretti himself would announce through his Twitter account that the province had obtained the total financing for the work through the placement of bonds in the international capital market.

In short, this strategic project for Córdoba that was going to have in the beginning with financing provided or managed by international actors (initially through the National Bank of Economic and Social Development of Brazil -BNDES-, then through Chinese banks and own financing provided by the Odebrecht company) to depend exclusively, for its concretion, on the province’s own resources or obtained through debt through the issuance of government securities.

The second half of the year would be marked mainly by the progress of the work (according to the government by the end of the year 14% of the work had been completed and the work was planned to be completed by mid-2019), but also by the constants and recurring questions from sectors of the opposition and civil society in relation to the project. Especially after Córdoba was mentioned in the framework of the Lava Jato case as one of the destinations where the Odebrecht constructure paid bribes in Argentina.

Although the national government of Mauricio Macri began a campaign to review and investigate the possible involvement of Odebrecht in the payment of bribes in numerous public works projects in Argentina (which even led the national government to suspend the company to carry out works at a national level), the gas pipeline project in Córdoba was strangely excluded from said revision and the relevant explanations were never provided to justify such exclusion. Even the company continues to operate in the province despite its suspension at the national level (its main work is precisely that of gas pipelines in Córdoba) and the requirements from the opposition that the same be done at the provincial level. Given the lack of answers at the national level, some opposition legislators traveled to Brazil in October of this year to ask the prosecutors of the Lava Jato case to investigate the link between the Brazilian company in the payment of bribes in the framework of the bidding process in 2008 for the construction of trunk pipelines.

In this way, between marches and counter-marches, the balance of 2017 in relation to the trunk gas pipeline project throws little light and many shadows and suspicions in relation to the transparency and execution of the project. Not only because of the never entirely clear fall of Chinese financing at the beginning of the year but also, and above all, because of the way the provincial government has handled the involvement of the construction company Odebrecht in the work and the numerous causes of corruption that splash throughout Latin America and even in Argentina itself. Although the government of Schiaretti has detached the company from any kind of connection with the possible delivery of bribes and corruption in the bidding of the work (even with the support of the national government of Macri itself that has initiated a kind of “Crusade” against the Brazilian company for its actions in the country during the Kirchner government), the truth is that the year that ends leaves many questions and aspects not clarified about the project.

Undoubtedly, 2017 has left a huge debt outstanding in terms of transparency and accountability in relation to this strategic and emblematic project for Córdoba. From FUNDEPS, we expect this debt to be paid in 2018.

More information

– Working Document: Transparency in the gasification project of localities in the interior of the province of Córdoba by Melanie Mackenzie – December 2017. FUNDEPS.

– Notes and publications of FUNDEPS in relation to trunk gas pipelines.

–  Main gas pipelines in Córdoba: a work that advances in the shadow of corruption by Agustina Palencia – December 2017. El Entramado. FUNDEPS.

Image source

La Voz del Interior

Authors

Macarena Lourdes Mustafa / Voluntaria del Área de Gobernabilidad Global

Gonzalo Roza / Coordinador del Área de Gobernabilidad Global

Contact

Gonzalo Roza / Coordinador del Área de Gobernabilidad Global

gon.roza@fundeps.org

“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 2015, negotiations began on the regional agreement on access to information, participation and justice in environmental matters. From that moment on, meetings of the Negotiating Committee took place, in which the text proposals of the countries regarding the preliminary document of the regional agreement were discussed, reviewed and approved. This document consists of a preamble and twenty-five articles.

This process was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio + 20) in 2012, with the Declaration on the Application of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. In November 2014, the countries approved the Santiago Decision, through which they began the negotiation of a regional instrument on access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters in Latin America and the Caribbean. . This, with significant public participation and the support of ECLAC, in its capacity as Technical Secretariat. The Declaration currently has 24 signatory countries, with the recent incorporation of Saint Lucia and is open to the accession of all the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.

In the Seventh Meeting of the Committee, held in Buenos Aires from July 31 to August 4, 2017, the articles on Access to Information and Public Participation (6th, 7th and 8th) were agreed upon. However, representatives of society were quick to show their concern about the serious setback in the progress of the negotiations. After this seventh meeting, civil society made the following recommendations to be able to guarantee the correctness of the negotiations:

1. The participation of the UN and IACHR rapporteurs related to these rights, since the standards of the Inter-American Human Rights System on the rights of access to information, participation and environmental justice could be weakened by the agreements to which they are arriving in the negotiations of Principle 10.

2. The evaluation by governments and ECLAC of the degree of progress and regressivity of the text that has been negotiated so far between the countries, since standards achieved at the national level in some countries and at the regional level have been reduced.

3. Link the Regional Agreement of Principle 10 and the 2030 Agenda, so that there is integration and coordination of both initiatives. Therefore, it is necessary that there are reports of compliance with the SDGs in our countries where information related to actions for the better implementation of Principle 10 is included.

4. Do not go back on the regime of exceptions that has been introduced into the text, which allows States more possibilities to deny information to citizens, but to guarantee the dissemination of the greatest amount of environmental information, such as pollutant emissions and studies. of environmental impact. In addition, recognize indigenous monitoring and monitoring, as a form of legitimate participation, an indispensable preventive measure to avoid environmental damage. Also, recognize the broad active legitimacy, which allows any person or group access to justice to protect the environment.

5. Include in the text, the duty of the states to GUARANTEE the rights of access to information, participation and environmental justice, and not use verbs such as “facilitate, promote and encourage”, thus contravening the current standards of rights humans.

6. A Regional Agreement on Principle 10 that is BINDING, that clearly incorporates the intercultural and gender approach in favor of vulnerable populations, especially indigenous peoples, and human rights defenders, in recognition of the reality of violence that they are facing in our countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.

In this regard, at the opening of the eighth meeting, Andrea Sanhueza elected representative of the public, said: “We have reached a turning point. This is the last opportunity to amend the course and return to the original spirit of the process. We can not allow environmental and social rights to remain the poor relatives of sustainable development. That is also why the agreement must ensure the protection of environmental defenders.”

Finally, that was one of the main results of the meeting, as the countries agreed to consecrate the protection of people who fight for the defense of human rights in environmental matters in the future regional agreement.

This means that the signatory countries were obliged to guarantee the recognition, protection and promotion of their rights to freedom of opinion, freedom of assembly, peaceful association, freedom of movement and the free exercise of their rights. The situation of defenders Environmental impacts in Latin America have been getting worse as the years have gone by. During 2016, more than 200 environmental defenders lost their lives in an effort to demand their rights violated. 60% of these cases were registered in the Latin American region. The fact that during the last negotiations of the Regional Agreement, it has been possible to incorporate an article that protects these people, is fundamental when it comes to advancing towards the effective guarantee of Human Rights.

At the meeting, other important advances were made on the final text of the regional instrument. Among them were articles on access to justice in environmental matters, and on capacity building and cooperation, and also approved most of the general obligations.

In addition, the main objective of the Agreement was approved, which seeks to “guarantee the full and effective implementation in Latin America and the Caribbean of the rights of access to environmental information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters. , as well as the creation and strengthening of capacities and cooperation, contributing to the protection of the right of each person and of present and future generations to live in a healthy environment and sustainable development “.

On the occasion of the meeting, experts from the UN issued a communiqué urging governments to adopt a firm agreement on environmental rights. “It is crucial that the governments of the region act in solidarity and accept legally binding norms to protect human rights and the environment,” they said.

At the end of the eighth meeting, the participants recognized the significant consensus and definitions reached on the text compiled by the Board of Directors in this week of negotiations and agreed to continue with the discussion of the articles still pending from the legal document (11 to 25) during the following meeting, which will be held in the first quarter of 2018 in San José, Costa Rica.

More information

– Pronouncement of civil society organizations

– Press release from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

– Message from the elected representatives of the public – Principle 10

Authors

Noelia Salvia

Agustina Palencia

Contact

María Perez Alsina <mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org>

“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”

 

Poder Ciudadano, el Centro de Investigación y Prevención de la Criminalidad Económica (CIPCE), la Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ), Fundación Nuestra Mendoza, Centro Latinoamericano de Derechos Humanos (CLADH), Acción Ciudadana Areco, Fundación para el Desarrollo de Políticas Sustentables (FUNDEPS), Fundación Transparencia Ciudadana y, la fundación Salta Transparente; We make up the Network of Anti-Corruption Organizations, with the aim of generating a concrete impact on public policies linked to the prevention and mitigation of corruption in all corners of the country.

Argentina is going through a crisis of systemic and structural corruption, which will continue to worsen as long as public policies and deep institutional reforms are not carried out, aimed at preventing and diminishing this scourge. In view of this situation, civil society organizations in general, and those working in the strengthening of democracy and the fight against corruption in particular, face great difficulties to achieve an effective impact on this issue; This is why it is necessary to propose a new strategy of systemic approach to generate substantial reforms.

The R.O.C.C. It was conceived as a dynamic space that will allow all its members to generate greater incidence in public policies, promote citizen participation and access to public information as essential tools in the fight against corruption, and even take concrete judicial actions jointly .

Among the objectives is the generation of discussion spaces on different problems related to the phenomenon of corruption and intervention mechanisms; the joint work in advocacy for the implementation of public policies whose purpose is to generate integrity systems at all levels of the State; and advise other social organizations on the implementation of anti-corruption tools and social control of public management.

Contact

Agustina Palencia <agustinapalencia@fundeps.org>

We were present at the Open Government Alliance Summit (OGP Summit), which took place in Paris from 7 to 9 December. Next, more information on what is OGP and what was the 4th meeting of this alliance.

“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.”

 

What is OGP?

It is an initiative made up of more than 70 countries to promote open government policies. This implies that governments are accountable, more open, and better responsive to citizens. To be a party, States must adhere to the Open Government Statement, submit an approved action plan with a public consultation process and commit to periodic reporting. This initiative is also a space of articulation between civil society and governments, both locally and nationally.

What was the summit?

After the inaugural ceremony on December 7, 2016, panels and workshops related to a wide variety of issues related to open government were held during the next two days. These could vary between topics such as open data, citizen participation, use of communication and information technologies (ICTs), transparency in public tenders, among others. The different activities were also traversed by agendas such as climate change or gender.

More than 4000 people participated, including heads of state, thousands of representatives of civil society and people from the field of ICT. This culminated with the Paris Declaration. In addition to being a learning space on everything related to open government, the summit was an opportunity to create synergies among the different actors of civil society, as well as to create instances of collaboration with governments. In pursuit of a more democratic society, the Alliance provides opportunities to develop and promote open government reforms.

Subnational governments are also a part of

In the process of promoting open governments, cities and federal entities are also included. In relation to this, we were participating in the Regional Meeting of Subnational Entities by the Open Government and the Federal Open Government Meeting was held in Cordoba on December 15 and 16. In this last instance, efforts were made to make proposals for commitments at the national and provincial levels, so that Argentina should present its third action plan in 2017 and expect provincial commitments.

More information

Contact

Agustina Palencia – agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

Carolina Tamagnini – carotamagnini@fundeps.org

“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”

 

Like every year, during the month of November, the United Nations Forum on Human Rights and Business is held in Geneva. Whenever this event takes place, a particular theme is designated that will be the protagonist. This year, this theme has to do with: ‘access to repair mechanisms’.

The umbrella that protects this high-level meeting is subject to the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. These Principles constitute the current tool to regulate the actions of national and transnational companies regarding human rights. They were born with the academic John Ruggie and were adopted by the United Nations in 2011, by the Human Rights Council, through resolution 17/4. The objectives of the Board at that time were: identify and clarify corporate responsibility standards; and clarify the role of states. To this end, the established guidelines were divided into three fundamental pillars: the duty of the State to protect human rights, the responsibility of companies to respect human rights and access to redress mechanisms.

The mandate of these guiding principles is to “reduce as much as possible the negative impacts of business on human rights in a short period of time“. They also have general characteristics: (a) they cover all States. (b) they cover all companies, of all sizes, in all sectors and in all countries. (c) identify different but complementary responsibilities between States and companies. (d) they do not create new legal obligations, they elaborate based on existing obligations and best practices for States and companies. (e) are based on the idea that it can not be compensated: positive impacts do not compensate for negative impacts on human rights elsewhere. (f) they are a mixture of regulatory and voluntary approaches.

The context that gave birth to these principles is not different from that of today. The actions of the companies (even after the adoption of the principles) and their consequences, continue to show that national and international regulatory frameworks have not met the objective of protecting human rights. During 2016 we have witnessed the largest massacre of human rights defenders. Around the world, vulnerable communities have been violated their rights (housing, health, life, a healthy environment, among others) because of the actions of companies and corporations.

This situation has shown that the guiding principles have not yet managed to become an effective preventive framework regarding human rights violations due to corporate actions. In this sense, it is understandable why in the session of the Forum this year 2017 has focused on access to reparation. This third pillar refers to the existence of effective remedies for victims of human rights violations. At the state level, it is expected that States take appropriate measures to investigate, punish and repair. On the part of the corporations, the principles encourage the existence of early warnings that identify negative impacts and allow resolving complaints before the situation escalates to more damaging scenarios.

Since DD.HH. are currently at the mercy of business activity, the role of the States becomes fundamental. Specifically in regard to the strengthening of regulatory frameworks at the domestic level. For this, an essential part of the obligations of the States has to do with: ensuring access to judicial and non-judicial mechanisms; and reduce the obstacles to access to justice. In this regard, it is necessary to emphasize that non-judicial mechanisms play a very important complementary role. Some of them include: State mechanisms, national human rights institutions, ombudsmen, complaints offices, National Contact Points (OECD), among others.

The application of the guiding principles by the States has been given through the form of National Plans of Action. It is expected that these plans will be constituted as instruments that:

– Promote greater coordination among government agencies with direct involvement in business issues and human rights.

– Promote the protection of human rights through due diligence in companies.

– Identify national priorities regarding this topic and translate them into concrete public policies

– Ensure monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the plan, in a continuous manner.

– Are based on a platform of continuous dialogue with all the actors involved (government, companies and civil society)

– Possess a flexible format for cooperation, coordination and international exchange of good practices and lessons learned.

– Strengthen regulations at the domestic level.

The result of the development of these plans around the world leaves much to be desired. There are still many States that have not embarked on this process and those that have done so have not succeeded in having their plans promote a framework strong enough to respect, protect and / or remedy.

The situation of widespread vulnerability to this problem has raised doubts about the effectiveness of the guiding principles, and a process to create a legally binding instrument has been developed at the same time. During the Forum, it is expected to debate about the roles that the principles and the binding treaty would occupy. Although opinions are divided (between those who support one initiative or another) it is necessary to clarify that the principles and the treaty are complementary. A binding instrument is a step forward with respect to the guidelines. To achieve this progress it is necessary to protect the autonomy of the process of construction of the treaty since, in short, this initiative would give greater impetus to the guiding principles, and would give greater and better content to the action plans.

More information

– Advancing towards a binding treaty on transnational corporations and human rights

– Discussions in Argentina regarding a business treaty and human rights

– We participate in the second regional consultation of ECLAC on human rights and companies

Author

 Agustina Palencia, agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

Contact

Juan Carballo, juanmcarballo@fundeps.org

“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.

Contact

agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

“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.

Contact

agustinapalencia@fundeps.org