---

Latin America

My Lords, I, too, begin by thanking the noble Baroness, Lady Hooper, and congratulating her on securing this debate. My knowledge and experience of Latin America is woefully incomplete. However, what little experience I have concerns a rather remarkable story that had dramatic beginnings. As many noble Lords will know, the British Council has a strong presence in Peru. In 2000, it worked with the Peruvian Press Council to develop greater access to information in the country and thus also to secure greater transparency. Many of your Lordships may remember that in November 2000, at precisely the date of our three-day international conference, then-President Fujimori disappeared. As I stood up to speak, the conference hall suddenly emptied of journalists. There had been a rumour that President Fujimori was reclaiming his Japanese citizenship and had effectively fled Peru. The rumour turned out to be true, and it created a wonderful opportunity to push for access to information in both law and practice. In Latin America in particular, access to public information is a big issue in that it is perceived as the essential component of transparency and the fight against corruption, inequality and authoritarianism. British Council policy, and its strength, is to work with civil society groups and to act as the interface between the people and the government. In that, it is highly successful. The perspicacious process begun in that year has continued and developed into a regional movement towards transparency and democratic accountability that has far-reaching consequences. The process itself is interesting. Following the initial, international meeting that agreed the Lima Principles on Access to Information, there followed many more meetings. Some were national discussions involving the armed forces on how to provide legislation narrow enough to avoid misinterpretation of the law, yet wide enough to protect legitimate interests such as national security. I remember in particular that a seminar held in the ancient university city of Arequipa reserved the front two rows for senior armed forces personnel, who sat there resplendent in their uniforms with glittering medals—not a usual sight for a human rights gathering. Other meetings were at the more local level and concerned the implementation of laws into practices benefiting the rural population. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office provided the British Council with a two-year grant to disseminate the right of access to information to the local authorities, the judiciary, civil society and public officials. An ombudsman was appointed. A hotline was set up to receive and deal with complaints from all over the country. The first ever access-to-information law was passed in Lima in August 2002. A series of high-level meetings was held between the Peruvian Foreign Ministry and the permanent mission at   the Organisation of American States, based in Washington DC. The result was the development of a co-ordinated policy to promote access to information throughout the Americas. In July 2003, the Peruvian delegation, working with the Peruvian Press Council, drafted an OAS resolution called Access to Information: strengthening democracy. The resolution was approved later that year. The speed of that process is, in the nature of such matters, breathtaking. But the process continued, with ever more efforts to persuade other Latin American countries to adopt enabling legislation. In October this year, the OAS will call a special session to exchange ideas and experiences with civil society organisations in information access. A document summarising best practices in the region would then become the basis for the OAS guidelines on access to information. In turn, that would act as an incentive for other countries in the region to adopt similar laws and practice. What is the point of this Peruvian story? At least two conclusions can be drawn. First, civil society organisations, which by definition occupy that space between the people and the government, are of vital importance in creating and maintaining democracy. In fact one might even go so far as to argue that, in the   absence of a civil society community, transition from—let us say—authoritarian government towards democracy will be fraught and possibly fail. Civil society organisations tend to fill the vacuum that inevitably occurs during changes in political systems. What follows is that anything we can do to promote the strengthening of civil society—even in those countries where there is   nothing approaching democracy—is a genuine democratic development. In the case of Peru, the synergistic forces of a new and open Foreign Ministry, and the Peruvian Press Council supported by the British Council, were impressive and effective. A second conclusion is that, of all the fundamental rights that individuals have—whether implemented or not— freedom of expression and access to information seem to be crucial in enforcing a degree of accountability on the part of government, and in affording people the   opportunity to influence policies that affect their lives and livelihoods. In that sense, free speech, an independent media and access to information act together as the cornerstone of democracy. What makes the story stand out is the willingness of the Peruvian Government to work with civil society organisations, to adopt laws that would harness—and to some extent have harnessed—their own power, to make strong efforts to ensure proper implementation of laws and proper complaint mechanisms, and to promote transparency at the regional level. Those efforts have contributed—and will continue to contribute—to an ever-more democratic process at least in Peru, and possibly for the region more generally.