Each year the OAS Secretary General publishes a proposed Program-Budget for the coming calendar year. The OAS General Assembly meets in a Special Session to approve the Program-Budget. Find these documents from 1998-2013 here.
Each year in April, the OAS Board of External Auditors publishes a report covering the previous calendar year’s financial results. Reports covering 1996-2016 may be found here.
Approximately six weeks after the end of each semester, the OAS publishes a Semiannual Management and Performance Report, which since 2013 includes reporting on programmatic results. The full texts may be found here.
Here you will find data on the Human Resources of the OAS, including its organizational structure, each organizational unit’s staffing, vacant posts, and performance contracts.
The OAS executes a variety of projects funded by donors. Evaluation reports are commissioned by donors. Reports of these evaluations may be found here.
The Inspector General provides the Secretary General with reports on the audits, investigations, and inspections conducted. These reports are made available to the Permanent Council. More information may be found here.
The OAS has discussed for several years the real estate issue, the funding required for maintenance and repairs, as well as the deferred maintenance of its historic buildings. The General Secretariat has provided a series of options for funding it. The most recent document, reflecting the current status of the Strategy, is CP/CAAP-3211/13 rev. 4.
Here you will find information related to the GS/OAS Procurement Operations, including a list of procurement notices for formal bids, links to the performance contract and travel control measure reports, the applicable procurement rules and regulations, and the training and qualifications of its staff.
The OAS Treasurer certifies the financial statements of all funds managed or administered by the GS/OAS. Here you will find the latest general purpose financial reports for the main OAS funds, as well as OAS Quarterly Financial Reports (QFRs).
Every year the GS/OAS publishes the annual operating plans for all areas of the Organization, used to aid in the formulation of the annual budget and as a way to provide follow-up on institutional mandates.
Here you will find information related to the OAS Strategic Plan 2016-2020, including its design, preparation and approval.
On October 28, 2017, I requested an opinion from the European Commission for Democracy through Law, known as the Venice Commission, on the subject of re-election. Recently, the Commission delivered its final report, which is unmistakable: presidential re-election is not a human right, and preventing re-election does not limit the rights of candidates or voters.
The report confirms the criteria proposed by the Electoral Observation Missions of the OAS.
For this reason, I will send this document to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Inter-American Court, and the Inter-American Juridical Committee.
We began this process because of the negative and repeated practice in the region of modifying the Constitution during a term to seek re-election or possible perpetuation in power in presidential systems. In some cases, worse still, attempts were made to do so without constitutional change, through judicial rulings.
In response to our request, the Commission approved a report edited by a diverse group of recognized independent experts in constitutional and electoral issues from South Korea, Spain, the United States, Finland, France and Mexico.
The report contains an exhaustive legal analysis, and concludes that the right to re-election is not a human right in itself, but is derived from the right to political participation and is not violated by the imposition of term limits.
These limits seek to avoid perpetuation in power and to ensure that democracy does not become de facto dictatorship.
That restriction – continues the report – comes from a sovereign decision of the people expressed in the organic part of their Constitution, and not in the chapter on fundamental rights.
Consequently, no one can argue that they have the right to run for re-election following a mandate if the Constitution says otherwise.
For the Venice Commission, the decision to alter or remove the limits of presidential mandates must be subject to public scrutiny, given that this change has a significant impact on the political system, on the stability of the country and on confidence in the electoral system. And, in any case, making this change requires a constitutional reform.
Last, but not least: the Commission concluded that removing the limits on presidential re-election is a step backwards in democratic consolidation.
The report of the Commission´s is not a political opinion. It is a document with full legal validity. Therefore, I have requested that this document be distributed to the member states, with the hope that it will become essential information in the long debate about re-election in the Americas.