Forms of public control in Latin American countries: a comparative legal analysis

The present article is devoted to a comparative legal analysis of forms of public control in 20 Latin American countries. The relevance of the study is determined by the increasing role of civil society institutions in the system of checks and balances of the modern state, as well as the need to systematize the diverse experiences of Latin American countries in this area against the backdrop of growing trends towards the narrowing of civic space in several states in the region. The work conducts a detailed analysis of the relationship between the concepts of "public control," "social control," "civil control," and "popular control," reveals their essential characteristics, criteria for differentiation, and offers an author's definition of public control. The concept of "forms of public control" is explored as a means of organized participation of citizens and their associations in evaluating the activities of public authorities. Based on the study of constitutional and administrative legislation, as well as law enforcement practices in all 20 countries of the region, an author's classification of forms of public control is proposed, including advisory, monitoring, initiative, and regulatory mechanisms, and a typology of countries by the level of development of relevant institutions is conducted. The methodological basis of the research comprises the comparative legal method, systemic analysis, the formal-legal method, as well as the method of legal modeling. Special attention is given to identifying and systematizing issues related to the normative-legal fixation and practical implementation of forms of public control. Major problems include restrictive legislation on "foreign agents" (Peru, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Ecuador), discretionary powers of the executive authority, deformation of the institutional environment (Mexico, Venezuela), a lack of legal protection mechanisms for civil activists, a gap between constitutional declarations and real practices, fragmented regulation, and the absence of mandatory force in the recommendations of regulatory bodies. In conclusion, a system of measures to resolve these issues is developed and justified, including recommendations for improving legislation (adoption of framework laws, establishment of mandatory force of recommendations, repeal of restrictive provisions), institutional transformations (creation of independent coordination centers, ensuring access to information, protection of activists), and measures to enhance the effectiveness of public control through the use of digital technologies.