Regional Norms for Access to Information: Building on Existing Instruments

1. Working Group FourRegional Norm-building: considering regional instruments and standards In light of the existing regional Declarations, Resolutions and Inter-American Court of Human Rights decision, this group considered the necessity and advisability of a regional convention or treaty to establish norms on the right to information and the potential mechanisms for monitoring compliance.

2. Issue Statement • The group debated the existence and necessity of normative regional instruments for ATI, as well as the importance of a defined path for advancing implementation, enforcement and monitoring. • The discussion took place in consideration of the diversity of national access to information experiences in the region, and the myriad existing declarations, resolutions, court decision etc.

3. Considerations • Starting with the distinct and diverse existing regional instruments: resolutions, declarations, decisions and interpretations for ATI, one can advance the construction of standards, with emphasis on implementation • The following stand out: the Declaration of Universal of 1948, Inter-American Convention of Human Rights of 1969, Pact of Nuevo Leon of 2001, the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression for the OAS of 1998, the Claude Reyes v. Chile decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are all standards that should be recognized and disseminated to the countries of the region. • The diversity of the region brings different challenges to the advancement of access to information and to identifying procedural norms • Is there a need for a regional instrument, or would it serve to ratify the lowest common denominator • Who would benefit from a regional norm – small states versus larger • How would compliance and monitoring of a regional instrument be assured • Would the focus be only on laws, and not enough on implementation

4. Regional Findings • In the Americas, we already have a great quantity of instruments (legal and political) that establish standards for access to information. Although there are benefits and positive aspects of the adoption of a regional convention, it is not a priority of the region. The priority is the strengthening and implementation of existing instruments to fulfill them in practice. • Diverse institutions within the OAS, the Department of International Law, Department of State Modernization and Governability, Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, the Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs, and the Trust for the Americas already have advanced recommendations for member states regarding ATI.

5. Regional Findings • Chapter about standards for freedom of expression and access to information in: Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression. 2008. • Absence of an internal policy of the OAS for access to information and transparency diminishes its credibility as a leader and its own capacity for ensuring the right of access to information

6. Recommendations & Action Points REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY: • Encourage the efforts of the OAS and the member states to advance the adoption of regional ATI instruments, with special emphasis on implementation, such as: archives, technology, production of information, model laws and indicators • OAS should adopt an internal policy for transparency and access to information • Exhort States compliance with treaties, resolutions, declarations and relevant jurisprudence STATES: • States should ensure compliance with existing regional instruments

7. Recommendations & Action Points NON-STATE ACTORS (Civil Society, Corporate and Professional Organizations): It is necessary for civil society to generate strategic litigation Non-state actors should ensure dissemination, diffusion, and promotion of regional instruments and existing advances, as well as their effects on access to public information in practice