Enforcing Democracy at the Regional Level: Paraguay's Suspension before the Mercosur Court

Abstract

Inaugurated in 1991 as a regional trade agreement between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay (M4), the Common Market of the South (Mercosur) followed an increasingly familiar pattern, serving as an institutional framework for harmonisation of wider economic and social policies between its members. In 1998, following allegations of an attempted coup in Paraguay, the M4, Chile and Bolivia agreed on a Protocol on Democratic Commitment in Mercosur (Ushuaia Protocol),1 whose Article 5 empowers parties to regional agreements, acting by consensus, to respond to a `breakdown of democracy' in one of them by suspending the latter's rights under the relevant agreements. On 29 June 2012, following a hasty deposition of Paraguay's President by the country's Congress, the presidents of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay (M3) decided to suspend Paraguay's rights to participate inMercosur decision-making. Paraguay responded by initiating a dispute before Mercosur's Permanent Review Court (Mercosur Court), invoking the emergency procedure provided for in Article 24 of the 2002 Olivos Protocol for the Solution of Controversies in the Mercosur (Olivos Protocol).2 Paraguay claimed that its suspension was null and void and, more importantly, that one of its consequences—the accession of Venezuela to Mercosur—should be reversed as a result. In less than two weeks,