Based on our National Endowment for Democracy (NED) research, we have compiled individual country reports on how governments have voted and acted in international forums regarding human rights and democratic norms. The information includes governments’ voting records and activities at the UN Human Rights Council, their participation and votes on the UN NGO Committee, their participation in and contributions to the Inter-American human rights system, their voting records at the Organization of American States (OAS) on matters related to the Inter-American Democratic Charter, their acceptance of credible international election monitoring missions, and their commitments to international treaties and domestic laws to reduce corruption and promote transparency.
Why? Because protecting and defending human rights and democracy doesn’t stop at a country’s borders.
Under the Kirchners a commitment to promoting human rights treaties internationally; domestically, not so much. But a new administration has brought change.
During the Meeting of Foreign Ministers on the Situation in Venezuela, at the 2017 OAS General Assembly, the Bahamas broke with many of its CARICOM members.
Under PT governments, Brazil was often an “enabler” of human rights violations, abstaining on critical declarations, often in alliance with a curious group of bedfellows. Will it change now?
Internationally, Bolivia’s position has been more oriented toward voting against human rights than defending them. But it has not been consistent.
While leaning more toward the liberal countries in some votes, on internal matters and on raising concerns over human rights in countries associated with its peace process, the Colombian government tended to hold its tongue.
Costa Rica is a liberal country, which upholds human rights in the UNHRC and plays a positive role in the inter-American System.
Cuba is the chief rogue regime in terms of its foreign policy and human rights.
Pique over regional and international condemnation over the treatment of Dominicans of Haitian descent provoked the Dominican Constitutional Court to deny that the Inter-American Court has any jurisdiction over the country.
Though a member of the Hugo Chavez’s-inspired ALBA bloc, Ecuador has a curious record in its international commitment to democratic norms and human rights.
A country with mixed record on human right and democracy overseas.
Coming out of the horrors of its own genocidal civil war and even in the midst of criminal violence and impunity, Guatemala largely is a consistent advocate for human rights in internationals forums.
Guyana has had a spotty record with international matters such as resistance to concerns raised over LGBT rights, torture and compliance. It also ranks third in the region for the highest female homicide rate.
Haiti has been an enabler of Venezuela’s descent into autocracy and chaos, even as it hosted and benefitted from 12 OAS electoral missions in the past 27 years.
Though it has its own troubled history with human rights domestically, internationally the government of Honduras remains a steadfast supporter of democratic and human rights norms.
Jamaica has broken with its Petro-Caribe benefactor, Venezuela, in the most recent OAS-General Assembly vote on the deterioration of democracy in Venezuela.
Mexico’s advocacy for human rights in the UN and outside its borders have masked an internal crackdown on human rights groups and independent media.
A member of the ALBA bloc, Nicaragua has demonstrated a consistent disregard for the Inter-American system dedicated to human rights and democracy.
A supporter of human rights in international forums. While it has voted in favor of certifying a NGOs for the UN ECOSOC, this stood in contrast to series of laws and regulations restricting the operation of civil society in its own country.
Under the presidency of Horacio Cartes, Paraguay has generally upheld human rights in the UNHRC but hasn’t always been cooperative in the inter-American system.
Since the transition to democracy after President Alberto Fujimori, Peru has been a solid proponent of democracy and human rights internationally.
St.Vincent and the Grenadines has voted consistently against democracy and human rights and in support of Venezuela.
Trinidad and Tobago has been largely resistant in taking and responding to recommendations concerning the serious issues of forced disappearances and respect for international human rights instruments. It has done worse on maters of hemispheric norms to defend democracy, abstaining on OAS Permanent Council votes regarding the situation in Venezuela.
Across different administrations, Uruguay has been a consistently liberal state in every major multilateral forum.