Following the same process used in the first round, each country will be reviewed by two other countries. The latter have three potential tools to evaluate how the Inter-American Convention against Corruption is being implemented: the government’s self-assessment, an independent assessment provided by civil society and the recommendations issued by the Committee of Experts in the first round. Both civil society and the governments will be completing the exact same questionnaire.

The methodology does not differ much from the first round. It continues to include general criteria (equal opportunity; functional equivalence; enhanced cooperation) and specific criteria. Read more here.

The methodology also includes guidelines for the Committee to follow in the analysis of the various areas: government procurement and hiring systems; protection for whistleblowers who report acts of corruption; acts of corruption (crimes).

Furthermore, Civil Society Organisations (CSO) can increase their involvement in follow-up efforts. Their reports and proposals can contain more diverse and relevant information in each area. At the national level, they can discuss the areas and their extent of implementation, helping to ensure the transparency policies are approached in a more comprehensive, clear-cut manner, accountability and anticorruption in their country. In terms of the OAS Follow-up Mechanism, CSOs can submit new information or additional and supplemental information that will help the Committee of Experts to make decisions based on the most reliable information possible. Not having civil society’s voice heard undermines the decisions made by the Committee and this can translate into recommendations that have little effect or relevance.