by Gina Romero (REDLAD) and Nicolás Panotto (GEMRIP)

[Translated from Spanish]

Reimagining democracy implies permanently updating the analysis of problems that limit or challenge democratic practices, actors and processes, pushing their borders. This article presents the study of a case in which, from a Latin American perspective, it was possible to build a plural democratic practice through increasing the visibility of political identities and silenced voices, and the complexity of the ways of understanding the incidence of citizenship and civil society in multilateral scenarios, and in particular in the Organization of American States (OAS), based on articulation with discourses, practices and spaces that are part of a religious perspective aligned with human rights.

The Context

During the last 15 years, Latin America has seen a growing presence of a sector of Christian churches -Evangelicals and Catholics- that have achieved notoriety in the public space through several interventions: from street mobilizations to political lobbying, going through proposals for bills and communication campaigns. The mobilization of these sectors, neo-conservative Christian groups, has resulted in the obstruction of potential advances in terms of inclusive public policies, laws on gender equality and other human rights issues, and in the promotion of a reductionist vision on the religious sector that has made invisible the diversity of progressive voices within it and created a growing conflict between the religious sector and a large sector of civil society organizations (CSO).

On the other hand, in the official dialogue scenarios at the OAS, there is a growing confrontation between organizations and social actors that defend sexual and reproductive rights and LGBTIQ+ rights and those that define themselves as ‘pro-life’ and ‘pro-family ‘, and to a large extent have the support of religious actors. This confrontation, visible in at least the last five General Assemblies, has increased the distrust of other actors about the possibility of coordination of civil society as an effective pressure group and has resulted in restrictions and threats to close the spaces for dialogue and participation in the OAS.

The Genesis

The Latin American and Caribbean Network for Democracy (REDLAD) has dedicated several national and hemispheric efforts to the empowerment of diverse population groups, including LGBTIQ+ leaders and the promotion of policies to recognize their rights. With regard to this group, a review of the actions carried out and the national scenarios carried out in mid-2016 showed a scenario of reversals and threats to the freedoms and rights acquired. The analysis concluded that the mobilization and incidence of many neoconservative religious groups was directly related to these processes. This fact raised the need to broaden the vision to cover a complete sector that until then REDLAD’s actions had not taken into account, despite its clear interference on the problem: the religious sector.

From the recognition of this situation, REDLAD undertook the task of develop a better understanding of the phenomenon and summoning new actors. This is how it came to the Group of Multidisciplinary Studies on Religion and Public Advocacy (GEMRIP). At the end of November 2016, a dialogue was held to open a channel of exchange and recognition between two worlds that until then seemed to be at odds: the religious world and LGBTIQ+ activism. With this, both organizations understood that new lines of study, dialogue, articulation and advocacy were required to shed light on the phenomenon, make actors visible, and build bridges between the two sectors.

Strategies and Their Successes

Until then, REDLAD knew little about the religious phenomenon, while GEMRIP had no contact with larger groups of CSOs, or articulation with the OAS. It was decided then to establish an alliance that began with the writing -from GEMRIP- of a document of characterization of the situation, identification of actors carrying an ‘alternative religiosity’, and formulation of proposals for joint action.

From there, a joint path was initiated, in the course of which various strategies were used to make visible the nuances of the religious sector (which until then civil society perceived as homogeneous and monolithic), to give voice to previously silenced actors, to promote dialogues and alliances between ‘different ones’ and amplify and deepen the dialogue on political incidence and religious phenomenon in the public sphere.

The strategies used were:

1. Deepening the understanding of the role of religion in the public sphere

One of the first initiatives was the publication in a book of a document conceived jointly by REDLAD and GEMRIP, entitled ‘Religions, Politics and the Secular State: New Approaches for the Latin American Context‘. Likewise, through dozens of GEMRIP articles that were spread by REDLAD, it was successfully covered different regional situations, such as electoral processes in Costa Rica and Colombia, legislative changes in Bolivia and Argentina, and legislative actions in Brazil.

Additionally, two texts were produced and published. First, the book Without Taboo, Religions and Sexual Diversity in Latin America, as well as a pedagogical document titled ’12 myths about religions and sexual diversity‘. Both publications not only constituted milestones in the regional academic production, but also became reference material and support for dialogue actions between LGBTIQ+ and religious sectors that took place in several countries.

Finally, in alliance with national actors, dialogues were held, in the form of forums and seminars, in Bogotá (October 2017), San José de Costa Rica (on the eve of the presidential second round, February 2018) and Lima – in this last case, accompanied by an act in a public park, in April 2018.

2. Creation of a coalition and participation in OAS General Assembly and the Summit of the Americas (2018)

Taking in account the clashes that took place in the OAS General Assemblies between progressive and conservative sectors of civil society, which were leading to the closing of participation spaces, REDLAD invited GEMRIP to participate in the 2017 Assembly, held in the month of June in Cancun, Mexico.

After this experience, GEMRIP produced an analysis on the progress of religious voices in the public sphere. Based on the formula prioritized by the OAS for the participation of civil society in assemblies and summits, in the second semester of 2017 GEMRIP entered into dialogue with religious, ecumenical institutions, that were human rights promoters and participants in instances of interreligious dialogue, to invite them to join a group that could be articulated around regional advocacy, in dialogue with other actors of civil society, including LGBTIQ + groups.

In November 2017, within the process of preparation for the Summit of the Americas 2018 (Lima, Peru, April 2018), it was created the Religions, Beliefs and Spiritualities in Dialogue with Civil Society Coalition. It was a milestone at the OAS: it was the first time that an actor of this type had a voice in the formal spaces of participation for civil society and social actors.

This coalition, which fundamentally represents actors of the regional religious progressive world, managed to insert itself in the hemispheric scenario as an actor that intentionally and publicly defends, among others, sexual and reproductive rights and sexual diversity, creating an alliance with groups and regional movements LGBTIQ+. For the OAS Assembly of 2018 (Washington, DC, June 2018), the articulation deepened and it was the LGBTIQ+ group within the Coalition who officially registered it and took its voice.

In short, the coalition defined a high point of collaboration between ‘different ones’ that resulted in the production of deep reflections on the role of the religious in the public space and brought hope to hundreds of actors who found potential new allies in a group that until then, they looked like an enemy. Since then, the religious world has begun to be seen as a possible ally even in processes of national advocay. In this way, it is possible to overcome, in part, the distrust that exists between both worlds, eliminating stigmas and expanding democratic dialogue.

3. Incidence in the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR)

As a hemispheric advocacy strategy, since mid-2016 some CSOs working on sexual and reproductive rights and LGBTIQ+ rights have begun requesting hearings before the IACHR to denounce the way in which religious interference was generating setbacks in the enjoyment of rights.

As a result of the joint effort of several organizations, the IACHR convened a hearing on secular State as part of the extraordinary sessions held in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, in May 2018. In this framework, REDLAD and GEMRIP presented a joint position based on two central claims.

In the first place, they argued the need to promote the establishment of truly secular States, considering as, although most Latin American states declare themselves secular, in practice they maintain an organic relationship with the Catholic Church and certain evangelical sectors, which violates neutrality in the management of public funds and blocks the advancement of inclusive public policies.

In second place, they called for the construction of spaces of dialogue with critical religious voices and aligned with human rights agendas, in order to remove the monopoly of religion from the neoconservative perspectives.

Thanks to this audience -the first to deal broadly with the issue of secular State and religious pluralism in the region – it was evident the need to deepen in this field.

Obstacles, Challenges, and Upcoming Paths

This joint exercise was motivated by the intention of promoting a basic pillar of democracy, plurality and diversity, and confronting, deconstructing and bringing back the monopoly, exclusive and homogenizing visions and practices. The recognition of the plurality of voices and complexity within the religious field allowed for the creation of a front of advocacy and resistance, together with other civil society organizations, to account for the bias, particularity and limitation of the neoconservative sectors, which say speak for the totality when in fact they only represent one voice among many.

In the future, we will continue to perform the following tasks:

In first place, we will work with the internal fears of the civil society since, in spite of the path advanced, there are still resistances against articulation with critical religious spaces. This joint work is required to prevent neoconservative religious voices from gaining more prominence.

Second, we will look for new strategies to confront the new actors present in the scenarios of the OAS, and more specifically to face the churches and pastors linked to the political world who are achieving great levels of organization and formalization in their advocacy projects.

Third, we will advance in the dialogue and the construction of advocacy strategies at a national level, focusing on tools developed at the regional level to apply them to more specific problems in specific areas.

Fourth, we will work on the difficulties in obtaining financing, resulting from the poor prioritization of these strategies in regional cooperation.

Fifth, we will seek spaces for dialogue and exchange of information and learning with actors from other regions of the world who have experiences with similar problems and practices.

Finally, we will build broader instances of visibility and communication of these efforts and results to reach a wider audience.