Search

Based on the Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case of Angulo Losada vs. Bolivia, we propose a reflection on the meaning of the gender perspective in law. Although this approach is not new in the jurisprudence of the Court, we will argue that the Judgment constitutes a turning point in its consolidation within the Inter-American Human Rights System. A review of the arguments used by the Court in previous cases in which it applied the gender perspective leads to the conclusion that the main novelty lies in the reparation measures agreed upon, which seek to have not only a restitutive effect but also, and mainly, a corrective effect to remedy what is referred to as a situation of structural discrimination against women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For several decades, various international organisations have been paying attention to the situation of human rights defenders. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has highlighted the importance of human rights defenders for democratic systems and has insisted on the duty of States to adopt protection measures in their favour. This article deals with three main aspects of this jurisprudence: 1) the definition of the category of human rights defenders; 2) the extension of the rights of this category; 3) reparations ordered in cases of violations of those rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To examine different aspects of the evolution and development of the right to life in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Moreover, to analyse certain cases related to the violation of this right and its procedural and substantial aspects. Methodology: The methods chosen for this article are Documental Analysis and Case Study. To conduct the research, the methodological technique of documental investigation will be used. The objectives will be reached through the examination, reading, and critique analysis of the documents. The methodological technique selected allows through the observation and the analysis of documentation to look back, understand, and interpret the current reality. The subject of study is the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR). The main documents are going to be texts of doctrine about this tribunal and the right to life and the case-law of contentious cases of this Court. Findings: This text establishes theoretical definitions. Furthermore, tries to define the crime of enforced disappearances that have been very important for the development of the right to life in the IACHR and which is a crime against humanity. Other important characteristic of this paper is that it examines the obligation to investigate, the procedural aspect of the right to life, the interpretation of Article 4 of the American Convention of Human Rights (Right to Life) and the proportionality of the use of the force of security forces in relation with the violation of the right to life. Value: To give important concepts about the study of the right to life taking as case study the evolution and development of this right in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Belügyi Szemle / Academic Journal of Internal Affairs is the property of Ministry of Interior of Hungary and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Direitos Fundamentais & Democracia is the property of Revista de Direitos Fundamentais & Democracia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Provisional measures constitute an integral part of international proceedings including those conducted by judicial and quasi-judicial bodies dealing with human rights complaints. As international legal proceedings have proved to be time-consuming, one could expect the rights asserted by one of the parties to the dispute would incur irreparable prejudice while the final judgment is pending. This would justify issuance of provisional measures. International judicial and quasi-judicial bodies have made provisional measures contingent upon satisfactions of certain requirements. The most important of these requirements are the risk of irreparable prejudice and urgency of the measures requested, because they provide the basis for legitimacy of provisional measures. In the present article, the concepts of the risk of irreparable prejudice and temporal urgency of the risk are analyzed through the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter- American Court of Human Rights. The study reveals that the said requirements are ascertained by these two human rights bodies through a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of a given case and the interpretation of the claimed rights in line with the protection of the beneficiaries' rights with emphasis on clear and convincing evidence in terms of plausibility of the alleged harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cadernos de Dereito Actual is the property of Asociacion Xuristas en Accion and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental is the property of Universitat Rovira I Virgili and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Jurídica (0103-3506) is the property of Revista Juridica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Políticas is the property of Revista Faculdad de Derecho y Ciencias Politicas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This work, developed in the area of Public International Law and Human Rights, addresses the theme of the jurisprudential evolution of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding the socio-environmental rights of original peoples, analyzing several cases that contributed to the formation of precedents and served as basis for the judgment of the first case of violation of the rights of original peoples in the country: the case Xucuru Community v. Brazil. In the end, it was concluded that the two bodies of the American Convention on Human Rights have played an important role in protecting the socioenvironmental rights of original peoples, but there are still challenges to be overcome, especially with regard to compliance with the reparatory measures imposed on States and which remain pending discharge. To develop this study, the type of exploratory research was used, based on normative, jurisprudential, bibliographical review and specialized articles on the Inter-American Human Rights System. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politica y Sociedad is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Chilena de Derecho is the property of Revista Chilena de Derecho and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Administración Pública is the property of Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights' judgment in Manuela and Others v El Salvador represents a missed opportunity for advancing abortion access and sexual and reproductive health and rights in international human rights law (IHRL). Even though this case is representative of the multiple human right violations arising from El Salvador's complete criminalisation of abortion and active prosecution of those suspected of having had the procedure, the Court shied away from engaging in a critique of El Salvador's abortion legislation. Instead, it focused on issues relating to pre-trial detention, due process, and medical confidentiality. Despite growing consensus in IHRL that abortion must be decriminalised at a minimum in certain circumstances; indications that the inter-American human rights system subscribes to this position; and extensive evidence that El Salvador's abortion legislation is resulting in human rights violations, the Court failed to use this judgment to articulate a clear and assertive position on the need for abortion access to realise sexual and reproductive health and rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the potential of transformative constitutionalism (TC) for reshaping labour law in Latin America. While traditionally labour law scholarship has been skeptical of the ability of the courts to protect labour rights, recent years have witnessed a return toexamining constitutions and the role of courts in the field. The article examines the concept of Transformative Labour Law in Latin America, which seeks to place the struggles between labour and capital within a legal discourse that can address the challenges faced by labour regulation in the region. By employing a methodology that combines constitutional theory and socio-legal literature, the article highlights the productive interactions between social processes and legal provisions. The article consists of five sections, beginning with an introduction that provides context for the study (I). Subsequent sections examine key features characterizing Latin American labour markets and identify challenges facing labour law (II), introduce TC in Latin America as a conceptual framework for analysing labour-capital relations through the law (III), and outline the key components of transformative labour law in the region (IV) before concluding with final remarks (V). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Jurídica (0103-3506) is the property of Revista Juridica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Situations of crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic expose the fissures in society, both domestic and global. Using violence against women as an example, the paper shows how structural risks amplify during crises and how the concept of due diligence can be used to address these risks. By focusing on prevention, it analyses the existing approaches towards due diligence in the context of violence against women by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, the Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women. The paper looks at how these mechanisms have considered the invocation and applicability of the duty of prevention with due diligence as well as the measures that states need to take to discharge such a duty. It concludes with a reflection on what can be done to further strengthen the arguments of the mechanisms analysed in this paper to utilise the full potential of due diligence concerning state obligations towards the prevention of violence against women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considering the external effects of adjudicative activity of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, structural questions emerge regarding the influence of IACtHR precedent in judicial branches of the Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights. In this sense, this paper seeks to apply the theoretical typologies developed by Ryan Goodman and Derek Jinks to the analysis of operative mechanisms of influence of international law inside the States' jurisdictions. In this regard, it was necessary to create new specific categories (eg, acculturative persuasive precedent, selective persuasive precedent), to test whether they suitably describe the application of Inter-American precedents, in an attempt to categorize the recent performance of the highest courts in Brazil, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, and Bolivia. Additionally, the concept of double control of conventionality has presented essential perspectives for the compliance with IACtHR judgments by demanding States, as well as the interpretation and application of national laws deemed compatible, or not, with the Pact of San José. In the end, quantitative analysis played an important role in measuring each national court's assimilation of international precedents as it outlined scenarios of explicit adoption of Inter-American Court precedent by national judicial branches. Sampled States were classified as follows: a) Brazil: selective persuasive IACtHR precedent with low performance; b) Colombia: acculturative persuasive IACtHR precedent with high performance; c) Argentina: selective persuasive IACtHR precedent with moderate performance; d) Chile: selective persuasive IACtHR precedent with high performance; and e) Bolivia: acculturative persuasive IACtHR precedent with moderate performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the last fifteen years, the European Court, the US Supreme Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights have all ruled on the issue of same-sex marriage. The Strasbourg Court has not, at this stage, dared to affirm the right to marriage, unlike its (inter)American counterparts. The article proposes a comparative analysis of the decisions rendered by the three jurisdictions: it highlights, beyond the (obvious and indisputable) differences between the three legal orders, the similar issues – of applicability, proportionality and subsidiarity – with which the judges responsible for ensuring respect for human rights are confronted. As the analysis also reveals, these issues are sometimes hotly debated within the courts themselves, while their understanding can be enriched by inter-jurisdictional dialogue. In conclusion, it is argued that, with regard to the recognition and protection of same-sex couples, the European Court should draw inspiration from American experiences and (1) clearly (re)affirm that the right to marry (art. 12 ECHR) applies to same-sex couples (2) mobilise the full potential of the prohibition of discrimination (art. 14 ECHR) and (3) move away from strict adherence to the European consensus rule. En los últimos quince años, el Tribunal Europeo, el Tribunal Supremo de Estados Unidos y la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos se han pronunciado sobre la cuestión del matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. El Tribunal de Estrasburgo no se ha atrevido, por el momento, a afirmar el derecho al matrimonio, a diferencia de sus homólogos (inter)americanos. El artículo propone un análisis comparativo de las decisiones dictadas por las tres jurisdicciones: pone de relieve, más allá de las diferencias (evidentes e indiscutibles) entre los tres ordenamientos jurídicos, las cuestiones similares –de aplicabilidad, proporcionalidad y subsidiariedad– a las que se enfrentan los jueces encargados de velar por el respeto de los derechos humanos. Como también revela el análisis, estas cuestiones son a veces objeto de acalorados debates en el seno de los propios tribunales, mientras que su comprensión puede verse enriquecida por el diálogo interjurisdiccional. En conclusión, se sostiene que, en lo que respecta al reconocimiento y la protección de las parejas del mismo sexo, el Tribunal Europeo debería inspirarse en las experiencias estadounidenses y (1) (re)afirmar claramente que el derecho a contraer matrimonio (art. 12 del CEDH) se aplica a las parejas del mismo sexo (2) movilizar todo el potencial de la prohibición de la discriminación (art. 14 del CEDH) y (3) alejarse de la estricta adhesión a la norma del consenso europeo. Available from: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1347

Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law (IHRL) may affect the universality of human rights norms and their legitimacy. This article analyses a recent case of contradiction between the European and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) regarding employment contracts of religious education teachers and the scope of religious autonomy. These courts reached contradictory conclusions on key substantive issues because they used different ways of framing the issue at stake, and different legal sources and interpretative methodologies. The analysis reveals that while the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) relied on the use of comparative law, a test of proportionality, and the margin of appreciation, the IACHR relied mainly on American domestic law and the opinions of two expert witnesses. In this case, the IACHR could learn from the approach of the ECHR to develop a more rigorous legal methodology in order to keep the coherence of the international legal system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The climate crisis will continue to affect human and natural systems across Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Undoubtedly, this jeopardizes entire communities' enjoyment of human rights. In that context, the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) is expected to respond, particularly since its organs have jurisdiction to order remedies over most LAC countries, provided they determine a rights violation. Despite the growing number of domestic human rights-based climate cases in the region, the organs of the IAHRS have yet to adjudicate and order remedies in a case concerning the climate crisis. Against this backdrop, this article inquires how to understand climate remedies from a political ecology perspective to capture the LAC climate litigation experience. Additionally, the article asks what the challenges of implementing such remedies may be. To answer these questions, first, it compares the remedial approaches of domestic courts in six finally decided climate-related cases with those of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) in 'anti-extractivist' cases. Second, it applies a political ecology lens to understand the elements that might hinder the implementation of the identified remedies. The article argues that the socioeconomic cost for States largely determines remedial compliance in domestic climate litigation and the IACtHR's anti-extractivist litigation. Ultimately, the aim is to anticipate the future of climate remedies and their effectiveness at the IACtHR based on present climate litigation in LAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Manuela and Beatriz cases were introduced in the Inter-American human rights system as strategic litigation to provoke an Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling that would create abortion rights in El Salvador, one of the most prolife countries in the region. The American Convention on Human Rights, a regional treaty binding on most Latin American and Caribbean countries, contains no provision on abortion, or on sexual and reproductive rights. It does contain, however, in article 4(1) a recognition of the unborn child's right to life and to legal protection thereof: «Every person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life». This paper analyzes arguments in the Beatriz Case, the ruling for which is still pending at the time of this writing, and the Manuela decision, issued in 2022, where the court gave the shocking and unprecedented order to create practical impunity for the crime of infanticide in national law. The paper examines its unexpected results and potential effects in national law, should the state choose to comply with all the orders given by the judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coastal States of the Mediterranean Sea tend toward a steady decrease in their search and rescue capacities. When a migrant boat sends out a distress signal, many ships in its vicinity either ignore it, merely observe the ship, or even move away from it. Rather than allowing people in distress onto rescue boats, the coastal States control the activity from a distance via, for example, mere distress calls. This lack of action occurs despite their legal obligation to protect under the law of the sea. Due to a maritime legal black hole, those stranded are effectively rendered rightless. This article examines whether a new jurisdictional approach may serve as a remedy and explores an intermediate design. It will assess this jurisdictional approach based on progressive Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Human Rights Committee cases while bearing in mind potential advantages and drawbacks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is a review of Harold Bertot Triana's book on the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR). The author analyzes topics such as the control of conventionality, diplomatic asylum, the rights of indigenous peoples, social and political rights, indefinite re-election, and the denunciation of the American Convention. The importance of the IACHR's work in protecting human rights in the American region is highlighted. Jurisprudential decisions regarding communal property, consultation and free consent of indigenous peoples, as well as political corruption and indefinite presidential re-election in Latin America, are also mentioned. [Extracted from the article]

The article addresses, as general problem, the risks to the right to life and health in indigenous tribes in Brazil after the SARS-COV-2 virus pandemic, especially through the cases presented to the Federal Supreme Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, analyzing the prospects for friendly solutions by the Brazilian government, with repercussions of the factual situation in the legal spheres of Constitutional Law and International Law, and possible legal remedies. The methodology uses theoretical and empirical research with a qualitative approach and a predominantly inductive logic, using bibliographical and documentary analysis as procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the sentence of the La Oroya vs. Peru Case, in which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights condemns the Peruvian State for violating human rights, including the right to a healthy environment and the right to health. The importance of corporate due diligence is highlighted according to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, as well as the "inter-Americanization" of the Escazú Agreement. The article also mentions the importance of considering the context, intersectionality, and intersectoriality when designing a system of corporate due diligence, as well as the generational perspective and future generations affected by human rights violations. The importance of the Escazú Agreement is emphasized, which seeks to protect environmental defenders and has three central axes: access to information, public participation, and access to environmental justice. The IACHR recognizes the importance of this agreement in cases of human rights and environmental violations. The article also analyzes the interconnection between the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the Escazú Agreement, highlighting the importance of removing obstacles to access to justice and considering the specific needs of victims. The need for the organs of the IACHR to provide guidance on corporate due diligence and other issues related to the interrelation between the environment and businesses is raised. [Extracted from the article]

This article aims to study Advisory Opinion 26, issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in November 2020. Through the analysis of the Court's pronouncement, the procedure for denouncing human rights treaties was addressed, notably on the interpretation of the denunciation clauses of the American Convention on Human Rights and the OAS Charter, as well as the consequences of the denunciation for the denouncing state, for people under its jurisdiction and for the other member States. To this end, an explanation is given of the main clarifications of the Inter-American Court regarding the denunciation procedure. After this explanation, the main conceptual advances present in OC-26/20 and what they represent for the regional protection of human rights are detected. Subsequently, the challenges that remained due to the failure to develop certain aspects by the Court are highlighted, given the criticisms made by the dissenting votes in the advisory opinion under study. Finally, it concludes by the relevance of OC-26/20 for the technical advance in the process of denouncing treaties and for guaranteeing the protection of human rights of those under jurisdiction under of a denouncing State, despite the existence of conceptual gaps that must be filled in the future by the Inter-American Court, given the possibility of giving rise to problematic interpretations, motivated by political interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ciencia Jurídica is the property of Universidad de Guanajuato and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional is the property of Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Remedies granted by both human rights courts and investment tribunals are generally based on the international law of state responsibility as codified by the International Law Commission (ILC) in 2001. However, some special rules (leges speciales) do exist in the statutes of human rights courts and in a few international investment agreements. Despite the different scopes of protection of the two areas of international law, there are remarkable similarities in judicial practice, yet important differences remain. This article explores to what extent there is already mutual influence in practice and where there is still room for mutual inspiration. It comes to the conclusion that investment tribunals could take more into consideration that victims may suffer damage, in particular non-material damage, by the mere violation of their rights. Conversely, human rights courts could pay closer attention to economic valuation criteria when it comes to the assessment of material damage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Opinião Jurídica is the property of Revista Opiniao Juridica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Anuario Español de Derecho Internacional is the property of Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Navarra, S.A. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Ibero-Latinoamericana de Seguros is the property of Pontificia Universidad Javeriana and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Dokuz Eylül University Law Review is the property of Dokuz Eyluel University, Faculty of Law Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Española de la Transparencia is the property of Asociacion de Profesionales de la Transparencia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Euro-Latin American Journal of Administrative Law / Revista Eurolatinoamericana de Derecho Administrativo is the property of Universidad Nacional del Litoral and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Runa: Archivo para las Ciencias del Hombre is the property of Runa: Archivo para las Ciencias del Hombre and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Políticas is the property of Revista Faculdad de Derecho y Ciencias Politicas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Foco (Interdisciplinary Studies Journal) is the property of Revista Foco and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Cet article examine les effets politiques des décisions de la Cour interaméricaine des droits de l’homme (CIDH) sur les peuples autochtones, en se concentrant sur le cas du Paraguay. Entre 2005 et 2010, trois communautés ont porté leurs revendications devant la Cour interaméricaine, et bien que les décisions aient été en leur faveur, il n’existe aucun dispositif juridique permettant de les mettre en oeuvre. Même si les décisions de la CIDH n’ont pas directement conduit à la reconnaissance des droits territoriaux par l’État, l’utilisation du droit international a eu des répercussions indirectes significatives en matière de politisation et de participation des communautés autochtones. En effet, l’expérience de la mobilisation juridique, c’est-à-dire de l’utilisation du droit et des normes juridiques comme moyen de faire progresser les droits dans la pratique, peut servir de levier politique pour les peuples autochtones qui en font usage. Les conséquences indirectes des mobilisations légales peuvent être expliquées par l’interaction de deux processus complémentaires, à savoir la légitimation interne et externe. En se basant sur l’étude de cas de la communauté de Xákmok Kásek et son passage devant la CIDH, l’article soutient que les répercussions indirectes de leurs actions légales peuvent contribuer à accroître leur participation politique.

This paper addresses the relationship between epistemic difference and hermeneutical injustice, starting from an example discussed by Townsend and Townsend: the case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. My thesis is that translation is inevitably at work in communicative exchanges involving epistemic difference, and that considering the problem of translation allows us to refine our understanding of epistemic injustice and mobilise further resources to respond to it. In a first step, I will discuss McGlynn's critique of Townsend and Townsend's approach, and in particular the notion of discursive injustice elaborated by Kukla. Drawing on the notion of symbolic institution as theorised by the Belgian phenomenologist Marc Richir, I will show how translation is at work in this case, seeking to pinpoint the hermeneutical injustice at play. In a second step, I will reflect on the different paradigms of translation and argue for a broad, processual and layered conception of it. Building on Antonio Gramsci's concept of translatability of languages, I will introduce the notion of epistemic translatability as that which allows translational strategies to be devised across epistemic difference in order to counter hermeneutical injustice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the rules contained in the three Vienna Conventions of 1969, 1978, and 1986 still constitute the framework for practice in the field of reservation to treaties, the development of the international community and with it the international system for the protection of human rights revealed a lack of clarity and some gaps in the Vienna regime of reservation which cannot be overlooked. Based on this, the European Court of Human Rights took the initiative and provided solutions to the practical difficulties imposed by previous conventions as well as developed new practices. Despite the opposition of several actors states to some of these practices, the great support given to the European monitoring bodies by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the United Nations human rights treaty bodies, in addition to the clarifications provided by the Human Rights Committee (HRC) concerning 'severability' theory to the International Law Commission (ILC), led to established practices of these bodies being codified. Codification took the form of guidelines in the 'Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties' which was adopted at the 63rd session of the ILC in 2011 after extensive study and debates, lasting nearly two decades, between members of the International Law Commission and within the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]