Inter-American System of Human Rights Protection Legal basis: treaties and declarations Relevant institutions Novel characteristics

OAS Charter and the American Declaration Establish HR standards for all OAS members. Declaration is a first. But…Declaration is not legally binding, and Charter is not very specific.

American Convention A binding treaty, addresses civil and political rights in detail. Of the 35 OAS States, 23 have ratified the Convention. (2 states have recently denounced)

Member States of the OAS and their Treaty Obligations Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, United States, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, St. Kitts y Nevis, Santa Lucia, San Vicente and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago(*), Uruguay, and Venezuela (*). States that have ratified the Convention (23): Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, Suriname, Uruguay. States that have accepted the Court’s Jurisdiction (20): Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, Suriname, Uruguay. Suspended: 2009: Cuba back in, Honduras out! (*) Trinidad-Tobago and Venezuela denounced the Convention. Source: Secretariat of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Inter-American Commission Jurisdiction over all OAS member states Gitmo Country visits and reports Individual petitions Precautionary measures Independent of a petition; Laparra, Nestora Hearings: themes or indiv cases Peruvian Amazon

Petition process Flexible procedures Prolonged silence from gov leads to the presumption of truth Once admissible, Commission must attempt friendly settlement (unlike HRC). Laparra: a first If it finds violations, it prepares a confidential report with recs. If case not submitted to Court, final report may be published.

Inter-American Commission Novel points and recent developments Many roles weaken position relative to state? Cases are getting larger Cases now more diversified Time of transition

Inter-American Court: getting there State must make special declaration. Only States and Commission can refer case. State given two months to comply with Commission’s report. Majority decision to prevent submission to Court.

Inter-American Court: procedures Once at Court, petitioners are autonomous Public hearings: often consolidate prelim objections, merits and reparations. Provisional measures: on motion by Comm and Ct. Once at Ct, by victims as well. Carpio, Barbados cases All rulings by Court are binding.

Inter-American Court Advisory opinions Interpret American Convention or “other treaties concerning human rights in American states” Authoritative interpretations of law. Rights of migrant workers, children… Clinic: hearing advisory opinion

Inter-American Court Novel points and recent developments Jura novit curia: ambitious application “court has the power and the duty to apply the relevant legal provisions” Not as much burden on petitioner New fund (2010): costs before Ct Extensive remedies and assertive compliance mechanism Vida digna

SARAYAKU natural resources found on and within indigenous and tribal people’s territories that are protected under Article 21 are those natural resources traditionally used and necessary for the very survival, development and continuation of such people’s way of life

SARAYAKU three safeguards: a) effective participation B) reasonable benefit from any such plan within their territory C) no concession unless and until independent and technically capable entities, with the State’s supervision, perform a prior environmental and social impact assessment