von Bogdandy, Piovesan, Ferrer Mac-Gregor, & Morales Antoniazzi: The Impact of the Inter-American Human Rights System: Transformations on the Ground

Armin von Bogdandy (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law), Flávia Piovesan (Pontifical Catholic Univ. of São Paulo), Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor (National Autonomous University of Mexico), & Mariela Morales Antoniazzi (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) have published The Impact of the Inter-American Human Rights System: Transformations on the Ground (Oxford Univ. Press 2024). The book is available open access. Here's the abstract:

The Inter-American System of Human Rights (IASHR) is certainly a source of innovation in human rights law and policy. However, uncertainty reigns over its true legal, political, and social effects as many decisions face serious problems of compliance. To better grasp the System's effects, this book broadens the focus from compliance to impact as the key criterion of effectiveness. Thus, The Impact of the Inter-American Human Rights System: Transformations on the Ground can reveal the IASHR's deep and multifaceted effects, not least by embedding a common law of human rights.

Outlining the IASHR's historic path and contemporary practice, this book shows legal, political, and social effects with respect to the main problems that trouble the Americas. Though most of these certainly continue to exist, the System is having a transformative impact on them on the ground, though with huge differences between issues and countries. These achievements as well as the variations should be of interest to academics, judges, and policymakers in Latin America as well as other regions undergoing similar stress, such as Central and Eastern Europe or Africa.

The Impact of the Inter-American Human Rights System brings together leading scholars in international and constitutional law, social sciences, and international relations to present a systematic and critical analysis of the impact of the IASHR in the various fields of its activity. These include issues of internal conflicts, transition to democracy, rights of vulnerable groups, social rights, the environment, digital rights, and the accountability of private actors. The book also offers evidence-based proposals to further enhance the transformative impact of the Inter-American System that could be taken up by courts and policymakers at the national, Inter-American, and global levels.

Contesse: Inter-States Disputes Under the Inter-American Human Rights System

Jorge Contesse (Rutgers Univ. - Law) has posted Inter-States Disputes Under the Inter-American Human Rights System. Here's the abstract:

Under the inter-American human rights system, inter-State disputes seem largely irrelevant. Such irrelevance contrasts with the European human rights system, where the amount of inter-State disputes is significant (and growing), and is similar to the African human rights regime, where there is a very low number of inter-State disputes. In more than four decades since the entry into force of the American Convention on Human Rights, there are only two inter-State disputes brought before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights—one of the two bodies that, along with the Inter-American Court, make up the regional human rights system. The virtual inexistence of inter-State complaints, however, does not mean an absence of human rights disputes among members of the Organization of American States (OAS). In fact, States resort to other mechanisms to process their disputes. Therefore, to explore how inter-States disputes actually operate under inter-American human rights law, it is necessary to broaden the view and look beyond the specific mechanism of inter-State communications established in the American Convention. This article discusses the two inter-State communications that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has so far examined, and analyses other mechanisms—typically, advisory opinions by the Inter-American Court—that serve as a substitute for inter-State communications. The article shows how OAS States use advisory opinions as a covert inter-State dispute mechanism and argues that the Inter-American Court should articulate a clear set of admissibility standards to address this practice.

Contesse: The American Convention on Human Rights in Latin American National Courts

Jorge Contesse (Rutgers Univ. - Law) has posted The American Convention on Human Rights in Latin American National Courts (in Research Handbook on Constitutional Interpretation, Catherine O'Regan, Carlos Bernal & Sujit Choudhry eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This Chapter addresses the role that Latin America’s major human rights treaty—the American Convention on Human Rights, adopted in 1969, with the Inter-American Court as its main interpreter—plays in constitutional interpretation conducted by national courts. The Chapter proceeds as follows: in Part II, I describe domestic constitutional law in Latin America, focusing on both national constitutions and decisions by Latin American courts. I show that the trend, since at least the late 1980s, is one of great interdependence between domestic and international law. Consequently, international law is a key interpretive guideline to domestic courts. In Part III, I discuss the Court’s main functions—contentious, advisory and monitoring—and explain how the Court has increasingly become a crucial tool for domestic constitutional interpretation. I use the anti-impunity doctrine and the articulation of the conventionality control doctrine as key examples of this trend. In this Part, I also use the same-sex marriage advisory opinion as an instance of robust interaction between the domestic and international realms. Finally, I turn to instances of domestic judicial implementation of the Court’s judgments as another example of the Court’s influence on national courts as a constitutional interpreter.

Tello Mendoza: Control de convencionalidad y Estado Constitucional de Derecho

Juan Alonso Tello Mendoza (Univ. of Barcelona - Law) has published Control de convencionalidad y Estado Constitucional de Derecho (Tirant 2023). Here's the abstract:

El control de convencionalidad es una doctrina creada por la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos a partir de 2006. Desde entonces, el desarrollo de su noción sugiere que la Corte IDH y toda autoridad estatal tienen el deber de oficio de realizar un control entre el llamado canon interamericano (compuesto por los tratados regionales de derechos humanos y los pronunciamientos de la Corte IDH) y todo el ordenamiento jurídico interno, de modo que, de estimarse una incompatibilidad, prevalezca el primero. Dicha figura ha generado un arduo debate político en la academia y los altos tribunales nacionales. En esta obra se explica el control de convencionalidad según es realizado por la Corte IDH, analizando si goza de sólida y suficiente fundamentación jurídica en las fuentes del Derecho Internacional Público. Asimismo, se pasa revista a su aplicación en diez Estados de la Región. Particular atención se presta a las implicancias de tal figura desde las categorías del Estado Constitucional de Derecho y a cómo esta doctrina pretende un tránsito hacia un Estado Convencional de Derecho. El autor argumenta por qué el control de convencionalidad según lo entiende la Corte IDH debe ser repensado para contar con una adecuada y consistente justificación en el Derecho Internacional a la vez de no poner en riesgo los principios basales del Estado Constitucional de Derecho.

Hennebel & Tigroudja: The American Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary

Ludovic Hennebel (Aix-Marseille Université - Law) & Hélène Tigroudja (Aix-Marseille Université - Law) have published The American Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary (Oxford Univ. Press 2022). Here's the abstract:

The American Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary is the first comprehensive and systematic article-by-article commentary of the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) in English. This book offers an exhaustive and critical analysis of each of the 82 articles of the Convention, covering the substantive elements of the rights and freedoms protected, as well as institutional and procedural aspects. Each chapter contains an introduction and a comparative perspective of the provision commented on; a review of the drafting history of the provision; and a critical commentary on the interpretation of the provision in light of the rich case-law of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Symposium: Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos en el siglo XXI / Inter-American System of Human Rights in the 21st Century

The latest issue of the International Journal of Constitutional Law (Vol. 19, no. 4, October 2021) contains a symposium on "Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos en el siglo XXI / Inter-American System of Human Rights in the 21st Century." Contents include:

• Symposium: Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos en el siglo XXI / Inter-American System of Human Rights in the 21st Century
• Ximena Fuentes Torrijo, La evolución de la relación normativa entre el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos y los sistemas jurídicos nacionales / The evolution of the normative relationship between the Interamerican System of Human Rights and national jurisdictions
• Carlos Bernal, Tres desafíos de legitimidad del Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos / Three legitimacy challenges to the InterAmerican System of Human Rights
• Alexandra Huneeus, ¿A quién le pertenece el Sistema Interamericano? Llamado a nuevas perspectivas sociojurídicas en la investigación académica / To whom does the Interamerican System belong? A call for new socio-legal perspectives
• Roberto Gargarella, La Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos y la “conversación entre iguales” / The Inter-American Human Rights Court and the “conversation among equals”
• Mariela Morales Antoniazzi, El mandato transformador del Sistema Interamericano como respuesta a la pandemia a la luz del test democrático / The Inter-American System’s transformative mandate as a response to the pandemic in light of the democratic test
• Elizabeth Salmón, La permanente necesidad de un mecanismo transparente de elección de miembros de la CIDH y la Corte IDH / The permanent need for a transparent mechanism for the election of the members of the IACHR and the IACtHR
• Francisca Pou Giménez, La igualdad sustantiva interamericana: Avances y debates pendientes / Inter-American substantive equality: Steps forward and pending debates
• Juana Acosta-López & Ana Idárraga, Retos de la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos en la categorización de conductas como crímenes internacionales / Challenges of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence in the categorization of conducts as international crimes
• Jorge Contesse, Autoridad y disenso en la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos / Authority and dissent in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Monteiro de Matos: Indigenous Land Rights in the Inter-American System: Substantive and Procedural Law

Mariana Monteiro de Matos (Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology) has published Indigenous Land Rights in the Inter-American System: Substantive and Procedural Law (Brill | Nijhoff 2021). Here's the abstract:

Rights to their traditional lands and resources are essential to the survival of indigenous peoples. They have been formulated and advanced in the most progressive way by the Inter-American system of human rights protection. In this book, Mariana Monteiro de Matos analyzes, in detailed and comprehensive inquiry, the pertinent jurisprudence of the Inter-American Commission and Court of Human Rights. She identifies three distinct waves of decision regarding the objects of ownership or possession, the rights associated, and the holders of the rights. Originally, the book also offers a profound analysis of corollary procedural law.

AJIL Unbound Symposium: The American Convention on Human Rights and its New Interlocutors

AJIL Unbound has posted a symposium on "The American Convention on Human Rights and its New Interlocutors." The symposium includes an introduction by Jorge Contesse and Alexandra Huneeus and contributions by Ximena Soley, Rene Urueña, Paulina García-Del Moral, Par Engstrom, Jorge Contesse, and Alexandra Huneeus.

von Bogdandy: The Transformative Mandate of the Inter-American System – Legality and Legitimacy of an Extraordinary Jurisgenerative Process

Armin von Bogdandy (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) has posted The Transformative Mandate of the Inter-American System – Legality and Legitimacy of an Extraordinary Jurisgenerative Process. Here's the abstract:

The American Convention on Human Rights has become a cornerstone of Latin American transformative constitutionalism. Worldwide, the Convention is perhaps the most important international instrument of this nature. The article explains how the Inter-American system received its mandate for supporting transformative constitutionalism and provides a glance into its social legitimacy today. It will show the common law of human rights it has developed and study the safeguards for its legitimate exercise. Lastly, it will sketch yardsticks to assess the system’s success and end with a note on the value of critique.

Antkowiak & Gonza: The American Convention on Human Rights: Essential Rights

Thomas M. Antkowiak (Seattle Univ. - Law) & Alejandra Gonza (Univ. of Washington - Law) have published The American Convention on Human Rights: Essential Rights (Oxford Univ. Press 2017). Here's the abstract:

This book offers a thorough, critical, and accessible analysis of the American Convention on Human Rights which is the main human rights treaty of the Americas. The authors closely review the jurisprudence and the binding judgments of the two institutions charged with interpreting the Convention: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.They focus on the rights most developed by the Court and Commission, namely the rights to equality, life, humane treatment, personal liberty, property, due process and judicial protection, as well as the freedom of expression and reparations. They examine the case law with a victim-centered lens while identifying key jurisprudential developments, discussing critical areas that lack consistency and rigor, and proposing alternative conceptual approaches.

Negishi: The Pro Homine Principle's Role in Regulating the Relationship between Conventionality Control and Constitutionality Control

Yota Negishi (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) has posted The Pro Homine Principle's Role in Regulating the Relationship between Conventionality Control and Constitutionality Control (European Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This paper conducts a comparative analysis of the American and European Conventions on Human Rights to review the relationship between conventionality control and constitutionality control assumed by domestic courts. First, the analysis negates the monist pyramid model by pointing out the limits of the supremacy of international law and constitution. Given the integration of conventionality control into constitutionality control in practice, this study instead presents the normative framework of the trapezium model, crowning the common values recognized by both national constitutions and international law. This research also contributes to clarifying the pro homine principle, a fitting concept to the trapezium schema, focusing on the most favorable treatment for individuals. Specifically, it proves the principle’s double function to offensively pierce or defensively safeguard the boundary between international and domestic legal orders. Finally, it argues that in cases of conflicting rights between different individuals, the pro homine principle relativizes an absolute protection of certain rights to strike balance between them. In essence, conventionality control and constitutionality control should be coordinated by the open-minded, substance-oriented, pro homine principle within the pluralist trapezium, in lieu of the principle of the closed, formal supremacy of international law or constitution within the monist pyramid.