Defenses to Criminal Liability and Serious Human Rights Violations: A Study on the Evolution of the Inter-American Court’s Jurisprudence
Abstract
The alleged international obligation of States to investigate, prosecute, and punish those responsible for human rights violations is impeded by the existence of domestic and international provisions that establish defenses to liability in favor of the accused. During the last decades, the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has attempted to resolve this dilemma, trying to determine to what extent the punishment of those responsible should prevail over rights that limit the criminal liability of each individual. Having analyzed all the judgments handed down by the Court, in this paper I propose to divide its jurisprudence into three stages, each characterized by a different legal approach to the problem. Such a division makes it possible to understand the evolution of the legal reasoning of the Inter-American Court and to identify with greater precision the current position held by the Court. It also makes it possible to critically analyze each of the changes undergone and to point out with greater precision some persistent shortcomings in its argumentation.
Downloads
References
Antkowiak, T. M. (2008). Remedial Approaches to Human Rights Violations: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Beyond. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 46(2), 351-419. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1329848.
Baluarte, D. C. (2012). Strategizing for Compliance: The Evolution of a Compliance Phase of Inter-American Court Litigation and the Strategic Imperative for Victims' Representatives. American University International Law Review, 27(2), 263-320.
Binder, C. (2011). The Prohibition of Amnesties by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. German Law Journal, 12(5), 1203-1230. https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r26381.pdf.
Cavallaro, J. L. y O'Connell, J. (2020). When Prosecution Is Not Enough: How the International Criminal Court Can Prevent Atrocity and Advance Accountability by Emulating Regional Human Rights Institutions. Yale Journal of International Law, 45, 1-67. https://openyls.law.yale.edu/handle/20.500.13051/6738.
Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho de los Tratados. (1968). Primera Sesión (Viena, 26 de marzo-24/05/1968). Registros resumidos de las reuniones plenarias y de las reuniones del Comité en Pleno. https://www.ilsa.org/Jessup/Jessup15/VCLT%20First%20Session.pdf.
Consejo Económico y Social de las Naciones Unidas. (1985). Informe Preliminar del Relator Especial Louis Joinet, Estudio sobre leyes de amnistía y su rol en la protección y promoción de derechos humanos.
Contesse, J. (2019). Resisting the Inter-American Human Rights System. Yale Journal of International Law, 44, 179-237. https://openyls.law.yale.edu/handle/20.500.13051/6734.
De Wet, E. (2004). The Prohibition of Torture as an International Norm of jus cogens and Its Implications for National and Customary Law. European Journal of International Law, 15(1), 97-121.
Elias, J. S. (2011). Justicia transicional y justicia internacional (A propósito del caso “Gómez Lund”). Revista de Derecho Comparado, 19, 165-193.
Engle, K. (2015). Anti-Impunity and the Turn to Criminal Law in Human Rights. Cornell Law Review, 100, 1069-1128. https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=4670&context=clr.
Hennebel, L. y Tigroudja, H. (2022). The American Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary. Oxford University Press.
Hillebrecht, C., Huneeus, A. y Borda, S. (2018). The Judicialization of Peace. Harvard International Law Journal, 59(2), 279-330. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/ilj/wp-content/uploads/sites/84/HLI204_crop-1.pdf.
LaPlante, L. J. (2009). Outlawing Amnesty: The Return of Criminal Justice in Transitional Justice Schemes. Virginia Journal of International Law, 49(4), 915-984.
Leyh, B. (2016). Nuremberg's Legacy within Transitional Justice: Prosecutions Are Here to Stay. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 15(4), 559-574. https://journals.library.wustl.edu/globalstudies/article/id/531/.
Malarino, E. (2012). Judicial Activism, Punitivism and Supranationalisation: Illiberal and Antidemocratic Tendencies of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. International Criminal Law Review, 12(4), 665-696.
Mégret, F. y Calderón, J. P. S. (2015). The Move Towards a Victim-Centred Concept of Criminal Law and the “Criminalization” of Inter-American Human Rights Law. En Haeck, Y., Ruiz-Chiriboga, O. y Burbano-Herrera, C. (Eds.), The Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Theory and Practice, Present And Future (pp. 419-441). Intersentia.
Naciones Unidas. (1993). Declaración y Programa de Acción de Viena. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Events/OHCHR20/VDPA_booklet_Spanish.pdf.
Naddeo, C. C. (2012). Praising the Region: What Might Complementary Criminal Justice System Learn from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights? En Van den Herik, L. y Stahn, C. (Eds.), The Diversification and Fragmentation of International Criminal Law (pp. 187-215). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Nazareno, P. (2020). Impunity Reconsidered: International Law, Domestic Politics, and the Pursuit of Justice. Harvard Human Rights Journal, 33, 173-274. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/hrj/wp-content/uploads/sites/83/2020/10/33HHRJ173-Nazareno.pdf.
Neuman, G. L. (2008). Import, Export, and Regional Consent in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. European Journal of International Law, 19(1), 101-123.
Roth-Arriaza, N. (1990). State Responsibility to Investigate and Prosecute Grave Human Rights Violations in International Law. California Law Review, 78(2), 449-513.
Schmalenbach, K. (2018). Article 27. En Dörr, O. y Schmalenbach, K. (Eds.), Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, A Commentary (pp. 493-504). Springer-Verlag.
Teitel, R. (2015). Transitional Justice and Judicial Activism - A Right to Accountability. Cornell International Law Journal, 48(2), 385-422. https://ww3.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/ILJ/upload/Teitel-final.pdf.
Tittemore, B. D. (2006). Ending Impunity in the Americas: The Role of the Inter-American Human Rights System in Advancing Accountability for Serious Crimes under International Law. Southwestern Journal of Law & Trade in the Americas, 12(2), 429-476.
Toselli, M. (2022). Repensando los préstamos constitucionales: un análisis crítico del uso de materiales foráneos desde la experiencia argentina. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 20(4), 1647-1674. https://academic.oup.com/icon/article/20/4/1647/7067179.
Zimmermann, A. (1995). Sovereign Immunity and Violations of International Jus Cogens - Some Critical Remarks. Michigan Journal of International Law, 16(2), 433-440. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol16/iss2/4.
Copyright (c) 2024 Matías Toselli
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This license allows the copy, distribution, exhibition and representation of the work provided authorship is acknowledged and the work is properly quoted. Commercial use of the original work or the generation of derived works are not allowed.
The authors hereby guarantee the right to the first publication of the work to the Revista Jurídica Austral.
