Plebiscite / Popular Initiative for Annulment of the Expiry Law
A popular initiative took place in response to the attempt to annul parts of the so-called "Expiry Law of the State Punitive Claim", an Amnesty Law for Crimes carried out during the dictatorship in Uruguay. The argument was that the law was inconsistent with international law subscribed by the Uruguayan State, and that the Constitution of the Republic could be the mechanism to ensure compliance with international law. The plebiscite was carried out by the National Coordinator for the Invalidity of the Law, a coalition of social and political organizations. When only about 48% of votes were obtained in favor, the proposal of annulment was rejected. That is to say, this was the second time that the Uruguayan people voted on this law, the first being in 1989 by means of a Referendum.
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?
- embedded in the constitution/legislation
- Mode of selection of participants
- Type of participants
- democratic innovation yields a binding decision