Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Organization of American States: Pioneering the Adoption and Design of Regional Institutions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Regional Organizations and Democracy, Human Rights, and the Rule of Law

Part of the book series: Governance and Limited Statehood ((GLS))

  • 338 Accesses

Abstract

The Organization of American States (OAS) is one of—if not the—pioneering regional organizations for the adoption and design of regional democracy and rule of law institutions. The OAS started to adopt and design regional institutions by the end of the 1980s. Within a short period of time, the OAS has developed an impressive set of standards and instruments to promote and protect democracy and the rule of law in its member states. Initially, the member states followed their demands and designed the democracy clause accordingly. At later instances of institutional re-designing, demands still mattered but the OAS was increasingly influenced by available reference models from organizations in the same region and that share a similar type.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    It is generally assumed that Resolution 1080 and the Protocol of Washington laid the basis for the adoption of similar suspension clauses in other ROs in the Western Hemisphere, such as MERCOSUR and the Andean Community. This was confirmed by Amb. Raúl Alberto Ricardes, Argentinian representative at the Permanent Council of the OAS in 2001: “It was also the influence of the Santiago Commitment and Resolution 1080 that led many to adopt inter-American instruments for the defense and consolidation of democracy. Thus, the Washington Protocol, adopted on 14 December 1992, which provides for the suspension of participation in the organs of the Organization for any member state ‘whose democratically constituted government has been overthrown by force.’ This was the germ that fueled the so-called democratic clauses which today characterize various forums, agencies and sub-regional integration schemes, such as MERCOSUR and the Andean Community.” (OAS 2001a: 14; own translation from Spanish).

  2. 2.

    The US delegation only provided a tabled proposal which is not on file with the OAS archives, and I could not locate the document in other sources either.

References

  • Abente Brun, D. (1999) ‘“People Power” in Paraguay’, Journal of Democracy 10(3), 93–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arceneaux, C. L. and Pion-Berlin, D. (2007) ‘Issues, Threats, and Institutions: Explaining OAS Responses to Democratic Dilemmas in Latin America’, Latin American Politics & Society 49(2), 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, D. S. (2005) ‘Non-Democratic Transitions: Reactions of the OAS and CARICOM to Aristide’s Departure’, Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 33(1), 249–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boniface, D. S. (2002) ‘Is There a Democratic Norm in the Americas? An Analysis of the Organization of American States’, Global Governance 8(3), 365–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, M. A. (2003) ‘Strengthening Checks and Balances: Democracy Defence and Promotion in the Americas’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 10(3), 101–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coe, B. N. (2019) Sovereignty in the South: Intrusive Regionalism in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. (2001) ‘The Quebec City ‘Democracy Summit’’, The Washington Quarterly 24(2), 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. (2003) ‘Ownership and the Canadian Model of New Multilateralism: Negotiating the Inter‐American Democratic Charter’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 10(3), 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. (2004) ‘The Making of the Inter-American Democratic Charter: A Case of Complex Multilateralism’, International Studies Perspectives 5(1), 92–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. and Legler, T. (eds.) (2006) Intervention Without Intervening? The OAS Defense and Promotion of Democracy in the Americas. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. and Legler, T. (2001a) ‘A Model for the Future? The OAS’s Mission to Peru’, Journal of Democracy 12(4), 123–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. and Legler, T. (2001b) ‘The OAS Democratic Solidarity Paradigm: Questions of Collective and National Leadership’, Latin American Politics and Society 43(1), 103–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. and Legler, T. (2005) ‘A Tale of Two Mesas: The OAS Defense of Democracy in Peru and Venezuela’, Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 11(4), 425–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. F. and Thérien, J. P. (2004) ‘The Inter‐American Regime of Citizenship: Bridging the Institutional Gap Between Democracy and Human Rights’, Third World Quarterly 25(4), 731–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. (2014) Realising Rights: How Regional Organisations Socialise Human Rights. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Farer, T. (ed.) (1996) Beyond Sovereignty. Collectively Defending Democracy in the Americas. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck, T. M. (1992) ‘The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance’, The American Journal of International Law 86(1), 46–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardini, G. L. (2010) The Origins of Mercosur. Democracy and Regionalization in South America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J. W. (2002) ‘A Magna Carta for the Americas. The Inter-American Democratic Charter: Genesis, Challenges and Canadian Connections’, FOCAL Policy Paper FPP-02-09.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. G. (2008) ‘Protecting Democracy in Europe and the Americas’, International Organization 62(3), 373–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. and Shaw, C. M. (2005) ‘The OAS and Legalizing Norms of Democracy’. In Legler, T., Lean, S. F. and Boniface, D. S. (eds.) Promoting Democracy in the Americas. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 21–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. G. and Shaw, C. M. (2008) ‘Legalising norms of democracy in the Americas’, Review of International Studies 34(3), 459–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heine, J. and Weiffen, B. (2014) 21st Century Democracy Promotion in the Americas. Standing Up for the Polity. London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herz, M. (2011) The Organization of American States. London and New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz, B. (2012) The Transformation of the Organization of American States: A Multilateral Framework for Regional Governance. London: Anthem Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, J. G. (2012) Monitoring Democracy: When International Election Observation Works, and Why It Often Fails. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Legler, T. (2003) ‘Peru Then and Now: The Inter‐American Democratic Charter and Peruvian Democratization’, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 10(3), 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legler, T. (2007) ‘The Inter-American Democratic Charter: Rhetoric or Reality?’. In Mace, G., Thérien, J.-P. and Haslam, P. (eds.) Governing the Americas: Assessing Multilateral Institutions. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legler, T. (2011) ‘Demise of the Inter-American Democracy Promotion Regime?’. In Mace, G., Cooper, A. F. and Shaw, T. M. (eds.) Inter-American Cooperation at a Crossroads. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legler, T. F. (2012) ‘The Shifting Sands of Regional Governance: The Case of Inter-American Democracy Promotion’, Politics & Policy 40(5), 848–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legler, T. and Tieku, T. K. (2010) ‘What Difference Can a Path Make? Regional Democracy Promotion Regimes in the Americas and Africa’, Democratization 17(3), 465–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, B. S. (2006) ‘A Desultory Defense of Democracy: OAS Resolution 1080 and the Inter-American Democratic Charter’, Latin American Politics and Society 48(3), 93–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, T. and Friedman, M. (2020) ‘The Promise of Precommitment in Democracy and Human Rights: The Hopeful, Forgotten Failure of the Larreta Doctrine‘, Perspectives on Politics 18(4), 1088–1103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, A. F. (1991) ‘The United States and Latin American Democracy: Learning from History’. In Lowenthal, A. F. (ed.) Exporting Democracy: The United States and Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 261–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, G. (1999) ‘The Origins, Nature, and Scope of the Hemispheric Project’. In Mace, G., Bélanger, L. and contributors (eds.) The Americas in Transition: The Contours of Regionalism. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, G., Cooper, A. F. and Shaw, T. M. (2011) ‘Introduction’. In Mace, G., Cooper, A. F. and Shaw, T. M. (eds.) Inter-American Cooperation at a Crossroads. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring, S. and Hagopian, F. (2005) ‘Introduction: The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America’. In Hagopian, F. and Mainwaring, S. (eds.) The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Major, F. (2007) ‘Canada. Democracy’s New Champion?’ In Legler, T., Lean, S. F. and Boniface, D. S. (eds.) Promoting Democracy in the Americas. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, J. (2006) ‘International Response to Democratic Crisis in the Americas, 1990–2005’, Democratization 13(5), 756–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, J. (2012) ‘Challenges for the Collective Defense of Democracy on the Tenth Anniversary of the Inter-American Democratic Charter’, Latin American Policy 3(1), 33–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meek, G. (1975) ‘U.S. Influence in the Organization of American States’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 17(3), 311–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, C. Z. (2001) ‘Modeling Regional Effects on State Policy Diffusion’, Political Research Quarterly 54(1), 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz, H. (1998) ‘The Right to Democracy in the Americas’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 40(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolte, D. (2010) ‘Paraguay: The President in his General’s Labyrinth’. Presidential Breakdowns in Latin America: Springer, 147–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1948) Charter of the Organization of American States. Signed at Bogotá, on 30 April 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1985) Protocol of Amendment to the Charter of the Organization of American States (“Protocol of Cartagena de Indias”). OEA/Ser.P AG/doc.16 (XIV-E/85) Rev. 2

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1989) Human Rights and Democracy: Electoral Monitoring, Resolution 991(XIX-0/89).

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1991) Representative Democracy. AG/RES. 1080 (XXI-O/91).

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1992) Protocol of Amendment to the Charter of the Organization of American States (A-56) (“Protocol of Washington”).

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1993) Protocol of Amendment to the Charter of the Organization of American States (“Protocol of Managua”).

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1996a) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 24 de abril de 1996. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1071/96.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1996b) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 24 de mayo de 1996. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1075/96.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1997) Resolution “Support for the Democratic Government of Paraguay,” April 23, 1996. Washington, DC: P/RES. 680 (1071/96).

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1999a) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 12 de mayo de 1999. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1191/99.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1999b) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 24 de marzo de 1999. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1185/99.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (1999c) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 31 de marzo de 1999. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1186/99.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2000) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 23 de octubre de 2000. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1254/00.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001a) Acta de la Sesión Extraordinaria celebarada el 28 de marzo de 2001. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1268/01.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001b) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 6 de septembrie de 2001. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1292/01.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001c) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 11 de julio de 2001. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1285/01.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001d) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 20 de junio de 2001. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1282/01.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001e) Acta de la Sesión Oridnaria celebarada el 27 de junio de 2001. Washington, DC: CP/ACTA 1283/01.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001f) Community of Democracies Meeting Concludes, Press Release E-040/01. February 21, 2001. http://www.oas.org/oaspage/press2002/en/press2001/February01/022101.htm [last accessed May 7, 2016].

  • OAS (2001g) Inter-American Democratic Charter.

    Google Scholar 

  • OAS (2001h) Peru Submits Democratic Charter Proposal for OAS General Assembly Dialogue of Ministers. Press Release E-089/01, April 18, 2001. http://www.oas.org/OASpage/press2002/en/press2001/Abril01/0418014.htm [last accessed May 7, 2016].

  • OAS (2005) The Program for Democratic Governance in the Americas, AG/RES. 2122 (XXXV-O/05).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pena, F. (1997) Integration and Democracy: The Experience of Mercosur. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez, C. A. (1990) ‘OAS Opportunities’, Foreign Policy 80, 52–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perina, R. M. (2015) The Organization of American States as the Advocate and Guardian of Democracy. An Insider’s Critical Assessment of its Role in Promoting and Defending Democracy. Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, A. (1991) Democracy and the Marker: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ribeiro Hoffmann, A. (2019) ‘Negotiating Normative Premises in Democracy Promotion: Venezuela and the Inter-American Democratic Charter’, Democratization 26(5), 815–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Root, R. K. (2011) ‘The Fujimori Effect’, Journal of Human Rights 10(3), 358–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudy, T. D. (2005) ‘A Quick Look at the Inter-American Democratic Charter of the OAS: What Is It and Is It “Legal”?’, Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 33(1), 237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santa-Cruz, A. (2005) ‘Constitutional Structures, Sovereignty, and the Emergence of Norms: The Case of International Election Monitoring’, International Organization 59(3), 663–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santa-Cruz, A. (2007) ‘Election Monitoring and the Western Hemisphere Idea’. In Legler, T., Lean, S. F. and Boniface, D. S. (eds.) Promoting Democracy in the Americas. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 133–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santiso, C. (2003) ‘The Gordian Knot of Brazilian Foreign Policy: Promoting Democracy while Respecting Sovereignty’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs 16(2), 343–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C. M. (2003) ‘Limits to Hegemonic Influence in the Organization of American States’, Latin American Politics and Society 45(3), 59–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C. M. (2007) ‘The United States: Rhetoric and Reality’. In Legler, T., Lean, S. F. and Boniface, D. S. (eds.) Promoting Democracy in the Americas. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 63–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sikkink, K. (2014) ‘Latin American Countries as Norm Protagonists of the Idea of International Human Rights’, Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 20(3), 389–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steves, F. (2001) ‘Regional Integration and Democratic Consolidation in the Southern Cone of Latin America’, Democratization 8(3), 75–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thérien, J.-P. and Mace, G. (2013) ‘Identity and Foreign Policy: Canada as a Nation of the Americas’, Latin American Politics and Society 55(2), 150–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of State (2001) Declaration of Quebec City: Third Summit of the Americas, April 22, 2001. http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/59660.htm [Last accessed May 7, 2016].

  • Valenzuela, A. (1997) ‘Paraguay: The Coup That Didn’t Happen’, Journal of Democracy 8(1), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiffen, B. (2012) ‘Persistence and Change in Regional Security Institutions: Does the OAS Still Have a Project?’, Contemporary Security Policy 33(2), 360–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, L. (1991) ‘The Imposition of Democracy’. In Lowenthal, A. F. (ed.) Exporting Democracy: The United States and Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 234–260.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

    Sören Stapel

Authors
  1. Sören Stapel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sören Stapel .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Stapel, S. (2022). The Organization of American States: Pioneering the Adoption and Design of Regional Institutions. In: Regional Organizations and Democracy, Human Rights, and the Rule of Law. Governance and Limited Statehood. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90398-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation