«Fostering Human Rights among European Policies Large-Scale FP7 Collaborative Project GA No. 320000 1 May 2013-30 April 2017 Report on the EU’s ...»
b) The Inter-American Council for the Integral Development The Inter-American Council for the Integral Development (CIDI) promotes cooperation among member states for integral development in order to reduce poverty, and it is directly answerable to the OAS GA.81 According to the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (‘Protocol of San Salvador’), the states party to this protocol shall send the progress reports of its implementation and effectiveness to the Inter-American Economic and Social Council and to the Inter-American Council for Education, Science and Culture.
Since these two institutions were replaced by the CIDI, all reports shall be sent to the CIDI.
c) The Inter-American Commission of Women The Inter-American Commission of Women is a specialised organisation of the OAS.82 It is ‘an intergovernmental organization established by multilateral agreement and having specific functions with respect to technical matters of common interest to the American States’.83 It has the responsibility to monitor the implementation of the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women and to request information from the IACtHR for the interpretation of the said convention.84 Finally, the Commission presents annual reports to the OAS GA and makes general recommendations to the OAS member states regarding the status of women’s human rights in the region.
d) The Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities According to the Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities,85 the Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities is the organ responsible for gathering information from member states regarding the implementation process and effective application of this convention. In such a way, it has the possibility to obtain key human rights information and to coordinate possible solutions based on it.
e) The Inter-American Indian Institute The Inter-American Indian Institute was created by the 1940 Pátzcuaro International Convention. The objectives of the Inter-American Indian Institute are to assist coordination of Indian affairs policies of the member states and to promote research and training of individuals engaged in the development of indigenous communities. The Institute has its headquarters in Mexico City. Thus, the Indian Institute is the governing body leading with its institutional implementation and, nowadays, its main For more information about the CIDI see www.oas.org/en/cidi/about.asp.
For more information about the Inter-American Commission of Women see www.oas.org/en/cim.
OAS Charter art 124.
Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence Against Women (‘Convention of Belém do Pará’) art 11: ‘The States Parties to this Convention and the Inter-American Commission of Women may request of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights advisory opinions on the interpretation of this Convention’.
Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (adopted 8 June 1999, entered into force 14 September 2001).
FRAME Deliverable No. 5.6 responsibility is to provide information in order to fight against discrimination.86 However, its activities have been declining and its closure is currently under discussion.
B. Mapping the EU: Major EU Human Rights Stakeholders involved directly or indirectly in cooperation with the OAS The following section will map the major stakeholders in the EU which are involved directly or indirectly/in theory or practice in cooperation with the OAS.87 More in-depth analyses of the competences and the work of the various actors will follow in the subsequent chapters of this report.
The European Council functions as the primary agenda setter and strategic body of the EU. According to Art. 26(1) TEU, it shall ‘identify the Union’s strategic interests, determine the objectives […] and define general guidelines’, and thus set the general political directions and priorities of EU foreign policy. So far, the European Council has only rarely addressed human rights issues,88 and not explicitly provided guidance on the EU’s cooperation with the OAS. However, it has underlined the Union’s ‘firmly-rooted belief in effective multilateralism’ and highlighted the ‘need for Europe to promote its interests and values more assertively’.89 The Council of the European Union is mandated with policy-making, coordinating and legislative functions.90 It meets in 10 different formations, depending on the policy area at hand. The Foreign Affairs Council ‘shall elaborate the Union’s external action on the basis of strategic guidelines laid down by the European Council and ensure that the Union’s action is consistent’.91 It is instrumental in the adoption of decisions concerning the EU’s human rights priorities and strategies in its cooperation with the OAS.92 Most notably, on 25 June 2012 the Foreign Affairs Council adopted the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, which provided strategic guidance for the Union’s engagement with regional organisations, explicitly referring to the OAS.93 Furthermore, since 2008, the Foreign Affairs Council has adopted a set of eleven Human Rights Guidelines, which stipulate the Union’s priorities and strategies on a variety of human rights issues. The majority of these Guidelines contain explicit guidelines for EU cooperation with regional organisations in general and with the OAS in particular.94 The Council is supported by a Secretariat, the Permanent Representatives Committee (‘COREPER’), the Political and Security Committee (‘PSC’) and more than 150 specialised committees and working parties. COREPER is tasked with ‘preparing the work of the Council’, ‘carrying out the tasks assigned OAS, ‘Report of the Inter-American Indian Institute to the Special Committee on Inter-American Summits Management’, OEA/Ser.G CE/GCI-9/95, 29 September 1995, www.summit-americas.org/CEGCI%20Docs/CEGCI-9-95-eng.htm.
For more detailed information on the various EU actors discussed in this chapter see Grażyna Baranowska, Anna-Luise Chané, David D’Hollander, Agata Hauser, Jakub Jaraczewski, Zdzisław Kędzia, Mariusz Lewicki, Anna Połczyńska, ‘Report on the analysis and critical assessment of EU engagement in UN bodies’, FRAME Deliverable 5.1, 30 November 2014, www.fp7-frame.eu/wp-content/materiale/reports/13-Deliverable-5.1.pdf, ch III.B.
ibid, ch III.B.1.
European Council, ‘Conclusions’, Doc No EUCO 21/1/10 REV 1, 16 September 2010, introduction and para 2.
Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union  OJ C115/13 (TEU) art 16(1).
TEU art 16(6).
See also infra, ch IV.
Council of the European Union, ‘EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy’ (n 1).
See infra ch IV.
FRAME Deliverable No. 5.6 to it by the latter’95 and ‘ensur[ing] consistency of the European Union’s policies and actions’.96 In its COREPER II formation (comprising the Permanent Representatives of the EU member states) it is responsible for examining all draft proposals before placing them on the agenda of the Council. The Political and Security Committee (PSC) is a permanent Council committee whose mandate includes monitoring the international situation within the area of the CFSP, contributing to policy making by delivering opinions to the Foreign Affairs Council, and monitoring the implementation of agreed policies.97 It plays an important role in the policy development process of the EU as it discusses and endorses at ambassadorial level proposals originating from the working groups before forwarding them to the COREPER. The Council Working Party on Human Rights (COHOM) is a key actor in defining the EU’s human rights policy. It drafts EU strategic human rights documents and ensures outreach to internal and external stakeholders during the preparatory stages. As such it was, for example, responsible for drafting the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan and most of the Union’s human rights guidelines.98 Next to thematic working parties, the Council has also geographic working parties.
The Council Working Party on Latin America (COLAT) deals with the Union’s relations with Latin American and Caribbean countries. It addresses a range of policy issues including the IASHR and human rights dialogues between the EU and Latin American states.99 The Council Working Party on Transatlantic Relations (COTRA) is responsible for matters concerning the Union’s relations with the USA and Canada.
The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice President of the Commission (HR/VP) conducts and contributes to the development of the Union’s CFSP.100 She chairs the Foreign Affairs Council,101 represents the Union externally for matters relating to the CFSP,102 and organises the coordination of EU member states’ positions in international organisations and conferences.103 The HR/VP meets with OAS representatives104 and delivers statements relating to OAS matters. For Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union  OJ C326/1 (TFEU) art 240(1).
Council Decision 2009/937/EU of 1 December 2009 adopting the Council's Rules of Procedure  OJ L325/35, art 19(1).
TEU art 38.
Note for example that the EU Guidelines on promoting compliance with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) were update by the Council Working Party on Public International Law (COJUR).
See for example the proposed agenda of the COLAT meeting on 30 April 2013 which lists the Inter-American Human Rights System as third agenda point, General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union, 26 April 2013, Doc No CM 2583/1/13 REV 1; or the draft agenda of the COLAT meeting on 11 September 2012, which lists the human rights dialogue with Brazil as the third agenda item, General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union, 6 September 2012, Doc No CM 4292/12.
TEU art 18(2).
TEU art 18(3), 27(1).
TEU art 15(6), 27(2).
TEU art 34(1).
See for example her meeting with the OAS Secretary General on 28 January 2015 in the framework of the Summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), OAS, ‘OAS Secretary General Met with Officials at the CELAC Summit’, 28 January 2015, www.oas.org/en/media_center/photonews.asp?sCodigo=FNE-16808.
FRAME Deliverable No. 5.6 example, in 2011 the HR/VP welcomed the readmission of Honduras to the OAS105 and in 2010 she commended the IACtHR for its work on feminicide.106 The European External Action Service (EEAS) is responsible for supporting the HR/VP in fulfilling her mandate,107 and for assisting ‘the President of the European Council, the President of the Commission, and the Commission in the exercise of their respective functions in the area of external relations’.108 At headquarters level, the Directorate for Human Rights and Democracy is tasked with mainstreaming human rights in the work of the EEAS. In addition, the Directorate for the Americas is responsible for the EU’s relations with the American continent. On the ground it is the EU Delegation to the United States, which represents the Union vis-à-vis the OAS.109 The Ambassador and Head of Delegation is simultaneously the Permanent Observer of the EU to the OAS. The Union’s role at the OAS is coordinated by the Political, Security and Development Section of the EU Delegation.110 OAS representatives and EEAS officials from both headquarters and delegation level have repeatedly met in the past years to discuss various issues of mutual concern.111 The EU Special Representative for Human Rights (EUSR) has been appointed in 2012 in order to contribute to enhancing the visibility and effectiveness of the Union’s human rights policy.112 His tasks include improving the coherence and mainstreaming of human rights in EU external action, as well as ‘enhanc[ing] dialogue with governments in third countries and international and regional Declaration by High Representative Catherine Ashton on behalf of the European Union on the readmission of Honduras to the Organisation of American States, 14 June 2011, Doc No 11082/3/11 REV 3, www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/cfsp/122383.pdf.
Declaration by the High Representative Catherine Ashton on behalf of the European Union on Feminicide, 30 June 2010, Doc No 11706/1/10 REV 1, www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/115578.pdf.
TEU art 27(3); Council Decision 2010/427/EU of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service  OJ L201/30, art 2(1).
ibid art 2(2).
See also TEU art 221(1) which provides that ‘Union delegations in third countries and at international organisations shall represent the Union’.
EU Delegation to the United States, ‘Political, Security and Development Section’, www.euintheus.org/whowe-are/meet-our-staff/political-security-and-development-psd-section/.
See for example the meeting of the OAS Secretary General and the Managing Director for the Americas of the EEAS in February 2011, OAS, ‘OAS Secretary General Meets with Managing Director for the Americas of the European External Action Service’, 28 February 2011, www.oas.org/en/media_center/photonews.asp?sCodigo=FNE-4882 or the recent meeting of the OAS Secretary General and the Permanent Observer of the EU to the OAS in January 2015, OAS, ‘OAS Secretary General Receives Permanent Observer of the EU’, 7 January 2015, www.oas.org/en/media_center/photonews.asp?sCodigo=FNE-16695.
Council Decision 2012/440/CFSP of 25 July 2012 appointing the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights  OJ L200/21; his mandate has been most recently renewed through Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/260 of 17 February 2015 extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights  OJ L43/29. For more information on the EUSR see also Dominik Tolksdorf, ‘EU Special Representatives: An Intergovernmental Tool in the Post-Lisbon Foreign Policy System?’ (2013) 10 European Foreign Affairs Review 471; Jan Wouters, Laura Beke, Anna-Luise Chané, David D’Hollander and Kolja Raube, ‘A comparative study of the EU and US approaches to human rights in external relations’ (2014) EXPO/B/DROI/2013/27, 65 et seq.