Reflections on the Organization of American States
RECENTLY, the secretary general of the Organization of American States, Luis Almagro Lemes, visited the Mona Campus of the University of the West Indies (UWI). One of the main purposes of the visit was for the secretary general to deliver a Distinguished Guest Lecture to students at the Faculty of Law.
UWI/UTECH
The students were mainly from the faculties of Law and Social Sciences at UWI, but as Dean Derrick McKoy of the UWI Faculty of Law noted in his introductory remarks, we were all very pleased to see law lecturers (Mr Harold Malcolm and Mrs Marcia Robinson) and students from the Faculty of Law at the University of Technology (UTech) present as well. UWI and UTech are proximate institutions that can only benefit from close collaboration in law and in other areas of common interest.
The OAS secretary general, who came to office in May 2015, was making his first visit to Jamaica since taking up his position. Speaking on the theme of “The Role of the OAS in a Changing Hemisphere”, Secretary General Almagro presented a broad overview of the work of the OAS Secretariat and the member states of the organisation.
The secretary general emphasised the four pillars of the OAS, namely, security, development, human rights and democracy, and showed how the OAS’ approach to each of these main areas could redound to the advantage of all states in the hemisphere.
Anti-Discrimination
Among other things, the secretary general said that this hemisphere, which accommodates one-seventh of the world’s population, remains challenged by the realities of underdevelopment and inequities in the distribution of wealth and income in respect of both countries and individuals. He also reminded us that the hemisphere has come out of a history characterised by discrimination in various forms, including discrimination on the basis of race, religion, political opinion and sexual orientation.
For the secretary general, the OAS has been active in seeking to rectify some of the sins of the past, as well as the present. As to the present, one area singled out for particular notice concerned corruption prevention. In this regard, the secretary general noted, in supporting terms, Jamaica’s draft legislation concerning the financing of political campaigns, arguing that the proposed Jamaican approach could serve as a model for other OAS member states.
Q & A
Secretary General Almagro’s Distinguished Guest Lecture was characterised by a vigorous question and answer session which, though planned for 15 minutes, went on for approximately one hour. This exchange was, in my opinion, a tribute to the lecturer, and to the audience, which numbered more than 200 people.
Professor Jessica Byron asked the secretary general to elaborate on the various educational and scholarship opportunities afforded to Caribbean students by the OAS. Dr Lisa Vasciannie raised questions relating to the OAS’ work in election observation in the Hemisphere and especially about funding and structural arrangements for free and fair elections.
Dr Sue Haughton pursued issues relating to regional security; Dr Yonique Campbell turned attention to drug legalisation policies contemplated by the OAS; and Dr Paul Ashley enquired about OAS efforts concerning “the ethnic cleansing” of Haitians in the Dominican Republic.
Students
From the students, too, questions addressed a variety of issues. These included, among other things: the OAS’ treatment of Cuba during the Cold War, the role of the OAS in addressing environmental concerns, efforts in relation to health and the Jamaican judiciary, the promotion of entrepreneurial opportunities in the hemisphere, general ways of tackling corruption, ways in which social media may be used to enhance the reach of the OAS, and the role of the organisation in civil society participation in local communities.
The secretary general’s responses to these questions, and others, have set the stage for greater interest on the part of Jamaican students in hemispheric affairs generally and in the work of the OAS in particular. This was one of the points taken up by Ms Christine Brooks, an outstanding UWI year two student who offered the vote of thanks to the secretary general, in English and Spanish.
Diversity
The visit of the OAS secretary general provides an opportunity for us briefly to cast an analytical eye on the work of that organisation.
Perhaps the first point to be noted is diversity of states that constitute the OAS. In relation to power considerations, the OAS includes among its membership the most powerful nation in the world, the USA, as well as a number of other politically influential countries (eg Canada, Brazil, Mexico). At the other end of the power spectrum, the OAS includes among its members, states which lack the main indicia of national strength.
On a related point, the member states of the OAS also differ considerably in size. Canada is the second largest country in the world in terms of land area, while USA, Brazil, and Mexico, are counted as the third, fifth and 14th largest countries. Again, at the other end of the spectrum, there are small Caribbean states which argue collectively that the international system should take our size into account in assessing developmental issues.
History
Within the OAS, there are also differences arising from historical and linguistic considerations. From a broad historical perspective, several OAS member states emerged from Spanish colonialism in the 19th century, and have retained, in large measure, civil law traditions, language, and socio-political features that reflect Latin American culture and values.
These countries, together with the USA, constitute the original core around which the OAS was constructed. And, partly as a result of this historical circumstance, the OAS continues to play a significant role in the political culture of most Latin American states.
So, for example, media coverage of OAS developments is substantial in most Latin American countries, and Latin American leaders are inclined to include the OAS as a strong avenue for the dissemination of their political perspectives and in the advancement of their governmental initiatives.
Anglo-African
Generally speaking, Caribbean States have had a different historical experience. True, the 14 members of Caricom have also emerged from colonialism, but our experience has been shaped largely by the interaction of British colonial power approaches and the enslavement of Africans.
Our reliance on the Westminster system of government and our affinity to the common law, our language and our cultural traditions turn much more on Anglo-African retentions, than upon Hispanic influences.
With respect to fairly recent history, Caribbean countries have had substantial interaction with some Latin American neighbours. Jamaicans and Bajans have, for instance, travelled in relatively large numbers to Panama in early 20th century to work on the construction of the Panama Canal; at the same time, areas along the Caribbean coast of Nicaragua and Costa Rica, retain Caribbean cultural features arising from 19th and 20th century migration.
Newcomers
In the main, however, Caricom countries have not embraced participation within the OAS to the same extent as our Latin American counterparts. This may be explained in part by our status as late arrivants to the Inter-American system. When the Charter of the OAS was adopted in 1948, Haiti alone among today’s Caricom States was in a position to join the organisation. All others needed to await independence from the British or Dutch (in the case of Suriname), and joined the OAS from the late 1960s onwards.
As relative newcomers, as small states, and as countries with an Anglo-African heritage, Caricom member states have had to reorient some of our perspectives to gain full advantage from membership of the OAS. With some exceptions, Caricom media houses do not offer substantial coverage of OAS developments, and, generally, the OAS enters public discourse only when particularly difficult public policy issues in the hemisphere arise for consideration. Against this background, the visit of OAS Secretary General Almagro to the UWI, at an early stage in his tenure, was of considerable importance.
Participation
The diversity of OAS
states with respect to power considerations, language, size
and other factors may be perceived primarily as difficulties to be overcome, but there is another way of looking at the situation. Diversity may bring strength, if each state is prepared to respect the viewpoints of others.
In practice, the OAS will, for example, provide an avenue through which small, presumably weaker States may “speak truth to power”, as much as it provides a convenient means for like-minded states to win over sceptics on particular issues.
But if the OAS is fully to take advantage of its diversity, it will need to embrace that diversity with greater enthusiasm. In this regard, at least two specific points may be mentioned. First, the OAS needs to reorient its employment arrangements to include a greater number of Caricom nationals at professional levels.
Example
Take, for example, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (the IACHR). The IACHR, which has exercised a fair degree of positive influence in the Caribbean, was comprised until recently of 34 professional staff members, mainly lawyers. Of these, only one professional was from the Caribbean, even though 14 of the 34 member states of the OAS are from the Caribbean — one out of 34.
With much effort, there has been an increase to two professional members, and the IACHR has introduced an internship expressly for Caribbean nationals, as well as an LLM scholarship programme for a Caribbean national. So, the IACHR Secretariat is mindful of the need for improvement in Caribbean participation, but progress there could be much greater.
Secretary General Almagro is also mindful of the broader problem of Caribbean under-representation, and has started out with decisive steps to improve the situation. At least five Caribbean nationals noted for work of high quality have been recruited into the senior ranks of the OAS under the new secretary general’s watch.
Symbolism
Secondly, if the OAS is to take advantage of its diversity, it will need to deal with the symbolism of history. Within the Hall of the Americas — the main headquarters of the OAS, which we are routinely told is “our house” — there are numerous symbolic representations (mainly busts and portraits) of hemispheric leaders.
Significantly, however, only two of the more than 30 or so representations relate to persons of African descent — namely, a bust of Jamaican National Hero Marcus Garvey and a portrait incorporating Toussaint L’Ouverture. The OAS needs to incorporate other black heroes and heroines in its panoply: Nanny of the Maroons, Cuffy, Bussa, Tacky, Paul Bogle, and Martin Luther King Jr have as much claim to public recognition in the OAS as some of the other heroes represented at “our house”.
Political Forum
The OAS, as a political forum open to all countries of the hemisphere, may make, or continue to make, a strong contribution to dispute-settlement in the hemisphere. As is well known, some OAS member states have longstanding border disputes. Among others, the Guyana/Venezuela, Belize/Guatemala and Suriname/Guyana have recently been in the news. It may be that the OAS, which includes all these countries within its ranks, could play a more active role in resolving these disputes in the interests of hemispheric peace and security.
As a political forum, the OAS should also continue to address issues such as the treatment of persons of Haitian descent in the Dominican Republic, specific ways of advancing economic development within the hemisphere, and strategies to counter drug-trafficking and human trafficking.
The organisation must also seek to retain its relevance in human rights issues. In this regard, it should be sensitive to the need to recognise cultural and social patterns that cannot be dismissed summarily, and it should redouble efforts to have Caricom States ratify relevant Inter-American human rights treaties.
Alternatives
In the course of its work, the OAS needs to contend with a variety of emergent political forces. In its earliest days, the OAS was largely subject to the political will of the USA. With the passage of time, though, this has changed, so that, in appropriate instances, OAS member states are not averse to criticising the USA for various actions, including, for instance, US attitudes towards Cuba (in the pre-Obama world).
Sometimes, however, it seems that some states within the OAS believe that alternative regional arrangements without the USA would be better for Latin America and the Caribbean. So, for instance, there has been pressure by some states to have the IACHR headquarters moved from the USA; and at times, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), which excludes the USA and Canada, addresses issues simultaneously being addressed within the OAS.
There may be arguments for CELAC, but, to be sure, the idea that CELAC should serve as an alternative to the OAS works to weaken the impact of the OAS in the hemisphere.
Sheldon McDonald
Sheldon McDonald was one of the architects of the Caribbean Court of Justice, working with Duke Pollard in the Caricom Unit responsible for issues arising under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. He helped to draft parts of the Agreement establishing the Court, and vigorously disseminated information about the Court throughout the Caribbean, especially information about the Original Jurisdiction of the Court relating to the Caricom Single Market and Economy.
At the time of his passing, and for several years previously, Mr McDonald was the Head of the Law Department at the University of Guyana. From his base on the Turkeyan Campus of that University, he published several scholarly articles on International Law, including items on the technical operations of various aspects of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, and on the Law of the Sea.
As an international lawyer of considerable influence in the Caribbean, Mr McDonald also played an active role in Caribbean human rights and investment issues. In relation to the former, he was instrumental in encouraging Caricom Governments to ratify Inter-American treaties relating to human rights, including the American Convention on Human Rights.
Small States
He was sensitive to the challenges faced by small states of the Caribbean in meeting obligations under these treaties (such as extensive reporting requirements) but remained firmly of the view that in our State practice, Caribbean States should always recognise the substance of our human rights obligations.
In earlier days, when he served the Government of Jamaica, Mr McDonald worked behind the scenes to assist in the payment of reparations to victims in the tragedy associated with the Constant Spring lock-up in 1992.
In relation to investment matters, Mr McDonald was an eloquent supporter of the idea that international investment agreements, and in particular, bilateral investment treaties, should contain flexible mechanisms to promote the interests of developing countries.
I well remember his powerful interventions at an international investment meeting organised by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in Geneva in about 1998. Mr McDonald played a prominent role in steering the gathering towards formal conclusions that were fully in keeping with developing country perspectives.
In recognition of Mr McDonald’s standing in International Law matters in the Caribbean, he served in 2013 as a member of the panel of three persons who constituted Jamaica’s National Group to select a candidate for the position of Judge of the International Court of Justice. The panel benefited considerably from Mr McDonald’s sense of judgement, as well as his substantial knowledge of all areas of International Law.
Rest in peace, Sheldon — you have played an excellent innings for the Caribbean.
Stephen Vasciannie is Professor of International Law at the University of the West Indies, Mona. He is a former Jamaica Ambassador to the USA and the Organization of American States, and has also served as a Deputy Solicitor General of Jamaica.