This mechanism allows for the review of States to examine whether they are enacting effective measures to combat corruption

It is no longer adequate that countries commit to an agreement and then decide for themselves how they will comply with it. Therefore many international conventions have, either within their bodies or as annexed protocol,incorporated the possibility of signatory states participating in a follow-up mechanism of self-evaluation or mutual evaluation.

Transparency International (TI) has been advocating for the creation of such a mechanism for the IACAC since 1998 by submitting recommendations and promoting the idea in international meetings. In April 2001, the Follow-up Mechanism (MESICIC) was achieved, as the majority of the States Parties to the Convention convened in Buenos Aires and adopted the Buenos Aires Report. This report regulates the most important aspects of the Mechanism, allowing for the review of states to examine whether they are enacting effective measures to combat corruption.

Since the creation of the Mechanism, TI has made recommendations to assure its effectiveness. Among other aspects, TI champions a more transparent Follow-up Mechanism and the formal participation of civil society in the process.

1. What are the general characteristics of the Follow-up Mechanism?

2. Which OAS bodies comprise the Mechanism?

3. How are countries being reviewed?

4. What are 'rounds' of analysis?

5. What criteria are used to review countries?

6. What has civil society done in the Follow-up Mechanism?

7. How can civil society participate in the review of countries?