Honduras

Participatory Consultation Process (Prior Consultation) with Indigenous and Afro-Honduran Peoples on the Free, Prior and Informed Consultation Draft Bill.

City/State/Region
Begin – End: 2016 – 2016
Name of organization in charge: Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD)Comisión Técnica Interinstitucional para la Consulta LibrePrevia e Informada
Type of organization in charge: government international organization
Level: regional national

Impact

?

Implementation: was the innovation effectively, partially or not put into practice at all?

Fulfillment of Aims: were the goals of the innovation completely, partially or not achieved at all?

Output: has the innovation generated recommendations, initiatives, decisions or policies?

Outcome: if there were a policy output, was it enacted or implemented?

Implementation: yes
Fulfillment of Democratic Innovation’s aim: yes
Output: yes
Policy Outcome: no

The Participatory Consultation Process with the Indigenous and Afro-Honduran peoples on the draft Law for Free, Prior and Informed Consultation in Honduras is an initiative led by the Government of Honduras in order to prepare the aforementioned bill. To this end, the Inter-Institutional Technical Commission for Free, Prior and Informed Consultation (Span. CLPI) was created to ensure that the process complies with international standards and provides guarantees of transparency and impartiality. In order to ensure the legitimacy of the draft bill among Indigenous and Afro-Honduran peoples and that its content responds to their real needs, a consultation process was carried out with the nine indigenous and Afro-Honduran groups, their communities, and more than 45 representative organizations. The purpose of this consultation was to discuss the constitutional recognition of their individual and collective rights to comply with Convention No. 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO), as ratified by Honduras in 1995 by Decree No. 26-94.

Institutional design

?

Formalization: is the innovation embedded in the constitution or legislation, in an administrative act, or not formalized at all?

Frequency: how often does the innovation take place: only once, sporadically, or is it permanent or regular?

Mode of Selection of Participants: is the innovation open to all participants, access is restricted to some kind of condition, or both methods apply?

Type of participants: those who participate are individual citizens, civil society organizations, private stakeholders or a combination of those?

Decisiveness: does the innovation takes binding, non-binding or no decision at all?

Co-governance: is there involvement of the government in the process or not?

Formalization: only backed by a governmental program or policy
Frequency: single
Mode of selection of participants: restricted
Type of participants: citizens civil society
Decisiveness: democratic innovation yields a non-binding decision
Co-Governance: yes

Means

Deliberation
Direct Voting
E-Participation
Citizen Representation

Ends

Accountability
Responsiveness
Rule of Law
Political Inclusion
Social Equality

Policy cycle

Agenda setting

Formulation and decision-making

Implementation

Policy Evaluation