Â鶹´«Ã½

National evaluation mechanisms are a key component ofÌýthe overall evaluation process forÌýcandidates toÌýthe Inter-Â鶹´«Ã½ Human Rights System (SIDH). In its prior reports, the Panel has made thisÌýclear;Ìýspecifically notingÌýthatÌýtheÌýdevelopment of transparent and participatory national nomination processes, based on the candidates' merits and competencies, contributes to guaranteeing the independence, impartiality, and suitability of the future members of the Inter-Â鶹´«Ã½ Court.

To this end, the Panel has observed that several states currently have suchÌýinternal processes. Below, we present (and applaud) the following States for developing policies that foster this level ofÌýtransparency, independence, and impartiality.Ìý

ARGENTINA:Ìý

In its 2023 report, the Panel observed that the vacancy for candidates for the Inter-Â鶹´«Ã½ Commission on Human Rights was published on the website of Argentina's Foreign Ministry. The selection process for Argetina's candidates included a "validation stage," and public hearings that included civil society participation.Ìý

Argentina's Selection Committee, composed of different areas of the Foreign Ministry, prepared a technical analysis report. Therein, that Committee informed theÌýPanel that, in its evaluation, itÌýtook into accountÌýthe following criteria, among others:

• Recognized competence and experience in the field of human rights.Ìý
• Commitment to international and regional human rights standardsÌý
• Knowledge of the Inter-Â鶹´«Ã½ Human Rights System
• Equal participation of women
• Federal representation; andÌý
• Language skills

This process was institutionalized through Resolution 20/2023 of February 6, 2023.

CHILE:

As referred to in the 2023 report, the Panel was informed that the process for nominating candidates toÌýthe SIDH began withÌýa search, carried out by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where 4 individuals wereÌýpre-selected.ÌýAccording to what was reported by the Chilean government, all of those individualsÌýmet the requirements of having high moral authority and recognized knowledge of human rights. Further,Ìýthe selection of theseÌýcandidates ensured there was aÌýbalance of gender and geographical representation from withinÌýthe country.ÌýThe four pre-candidates were then interviewed by a Commission, which was composed of the Director of Human Rights of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Director of Multilateral Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ambassador of Chile to the Organization of Â鶹´«Ã½ States, and the Head of the Protection Department of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights' Undersecretary of Human Rights. Likewise, the Defender of Children's Rights, as well asÌýa representative of the Director of the National Institute of Human Rights, participated as observers of the process. An official from the Human Rights Division acted as Secretary of the Commission.

Both theÌýCommission members andÌýobserversÌýwere provided information regardingÌýthe academic and professional background of the candidates, to assist them in theirÌýevaluation. In theirÌýinterviews, the pre-candidates answered questions organized around the following topics:

• High moral authorityÌý
• Recognized competency in human rights mattersÌý
• Independence and Impartiality; andÌý
• Contributions to the SIDH

Commission members and observers thenÌýhad to grade those answersÌýfrom 1 (minimum) to 7 (maximum), and were required to leave general comments about each pre-candidate. After the interviews, the Commission Secretariat prepared a report that was sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, detailing the grades awarded to each of the pre-candidates, and the comments of the evaluators.

Upon the conclusion of this process, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in agreement with the President of the Republic, selectedÌýthe Chilean candidate.

UNITED STATES:

The panel indicated in its 2023 report that it had received information from the United States government, stating that the government hadÌýrequested feedback from members of civil society and academia,Ìýregarding suggestions for who could be nominated to the Inter-Â鶹´«Ã½ Commission of Human Rights. The United States reportedly used the following criteria.

• Knowledge of public international law, international human rights law, and the SIDH
• Knowledge of the political and social context of Latin America and the Caribbean
• Mastery of Spanish and ideally Portuguese or French as a working language
• Adequate understanding of the US legal system, including domestic law's approach to international law and US positions regarding international human rights obligations
• Diplomatic and interpersonal skillsÌý
• The capacity to dedicate sufficient time and energy to the activities of the CIDH
• Ability to serve independently and impartially without affecting dignity or prestige as a commissioner
• Ability to go before the OAS Member States; andÌý
• Strong management skills

According to the informationÌýreceived, the described criteria did not include diversity, equity and inclusion, or accessibility (DEIA).ÌýLikewise, in the last selection process, the State Department granted civil society only two weeks to send information or feedback.

In its reports, it has been the consistent practice of this Panel to highlight the progress made in regard to nomination processes at the national level, and to similarly urge states to replicate these processes in future elections.ÌýLikewise, it has proposed that all States continue to advance their implementation of national evaluation mechanisms, which should beÌýgoverned by the principles of independence, impartiality, professionalism, transparency and participation.

To this end, the Panel has indicated thatÌýregardless of the final decision made by the competent bodies, the prior evaluation of the candidates via theseÌýinternal selection processes must be carried out by a committee of independent experts, through open, public and participatory procedures.