The return to in-person work

Thank you, Mr. Chair,

At the outset, we would like to thank the General Secretariat for presenting the report on current conditions for the return to in-person work, in follow-up to its proposals regarding the instructions contained in resolution CP/RES. 1187 (2350/21), which our delegation requested in a communication we sent on March 9.

Likewise, on March 1, our delegation had sent to you, in your capacity as Chair of this Permanent Council, dear Ambassador Hull, a first communication in which we asked you to consider convening in-person meetings of the Permanent Council and at the same time asked that the OAS General Secretariat present a report on current conditions for the return to in-person work, in follow-up to its proposals regarding the instructions contained in resolution CP/RES. 1187 (2350/21), “Adjustments to the Work of the Organs, Agencies and Entities of the Organization of American States,” adopted by the Permanent Council on November 22, 2021.

Those requests, Mr. Chair, dear colleagues, as we have seen, have had significant support within our Organization from a considerable number of member States and regional groups. That support has been expressed through notes sent to the General Secretariat and through words of encouragement at the various in-person protocolary and social gatherings we have regularly had in recent months.

Mr. Chair,

As everyone knows, the authorities of the city of Washington, D.C., and of the States of Virginia and Maryland have changed the rules on health protocols as the process of vaccination against COVID-19 has advanced and as infections continue to decline. This has brought a return to normal in work and in everyday activities. The mandates on social distancing, the compulsory use of masks and others practically no longer exist. So, could the Secretariat, or you, Mr. Chair, or some representative of the member States explain to us why we must maintain them for the Permanent Council of the OAS?

Dear colleagues, I think it prudent to recall a recent situation:

Last December, when it had barely begun to spread, the OMICRON variant was described by an experienced voice in this Council as “more dangerous than the DELTA variant.” There was not, at that moment, sufficient evidence to make such an assertion. But it did not matter, because for some the prevailing criterion seemed to be “why go back if we can be there from our homes?” That was a deliberate attempt to sow doubt and fear within this Council. A direct attack on the operation of this Organization. Those same voices have not spoken up about reconsidering the decisions that keep us meeting virtually, even though there is now sufficient evidence to change course and even though their representatives in other multilateral forums regularly attend to their work in person. That double standard stinks, and it lowers the quality of our work.

As for the document presented by the Secretariat, it is surprising that it should suggest that the format proposed for meetings from now on would entail restrictions that are NOT required in any other context of public or private life in our immediate geographic surroundings.

We ask the Secretariat to desist from recommendations which, given the picture described in its own report, have become absurd. We must go back to meeting in the Simón Bolívar Room, with no restriction whatever on access for the staff of our missions. Many of our officials have arrived in the past two years and have NEVER, let it be clearly heard, NEVER had meetings at headquarters or spent time with their colleagues. I find it personally disappointing that we should be discussing whether to return to meeting in person when we have already met dozens of times at social activities, receptions, lunches, dinners and cultural events.

In-person meetings are fundamental for the Organization's offices and political bodies, above all in view of the coming negotiations for the General Assembly and the organization of the Summit of the Americas. Enough of limiting the possibilities of working normally. Our delegation therefore asks that Title III of the report presented be deleted, and that hybrid meetings be contemplated only in cases of medium or high risk according to the data and statistics, with the delegations that require them covering the associated costs; we appeal to the good sense and rationality of the other member States to pronounce themselves TODAY on this matter, so that we may lay the foundations for a decision by consensus. A message of unity from this Council is needed.

Mr. Chair, dear colleagues,

The report presented this morning, as regards the statistics on COVID-19 infections in this city of Washington, D.C., and in the States of Maryland and Virginia, offers a picture favorable to this Permanent Council, under your chairmanship or the next, convening to meet in person, just as this Permanent Council provided when it amended its Rules of Procedure on July 14 of last year. Should the future bring situations like those of the past, then we will reconsider; but TODAY there are no reasons to continue with this arrangement.

Let us move forward with firm steps, with responsibility. To do otherwise will be to fail to rise to the needs and demands of this moment.

Thank you very much.