Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T07:31:14.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

L. Ronald Scheman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Notes and Comments
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , April 1965 , pp. 335 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace, Mexico City, February, 1945, Res. IX, Par. 9; see draft declaration and accompanying report of Inter- American Juridical Committee, Dec. 31, 1945, 40 A.J.I.L. Supp. 93 (1946).

2 Ninth International Conference of American States, Bogotá, March, 1948, Res. XXX; 43 A.J.I.L. Supp. 133 (1949).

3 The draft convention was completed at the Fourth Meeting of the Inter-American Council of Jurists, Santiago, Aug. 24-Sept. 9, 1959. See Final Act, OAS Doc. OEA/Ser. C/IV.4, CIJ-43, p. 43.

4 Part I of Res. VIII was approved unanimously. Part II was approved by a vote of 15-4, with 2 abstentions. On Sept. 10, 1959, shortly after the close of the Fifth Meeting of Consultation, the Council established a special committee to study Res. VIII, Part II. Its report and draft statute were received by the Council on Oct. 29, 1959, and sent to the governments for observations. See Report of the Special Committee, in Acta de la Sesi6n Ordinaria Celebrada el 29 de Octubre de 1959. Council of the OAS, Pan American Union, Washington, D.C., Council Doc. C-a-348, pp. 165 ff. The statute of the Commission was subsequently debated in the meetings of March 16, 1960 (Council Doc. C-a-363), and April 6, 1960 (Council Doc. C-a-366); voted in the meeting of May 25, 1960 (Council Doc. C-a-371); and amended on June 8, 1960 (Council Doc. C-a-373).

5 The individuals elected were: Angela Acuña de Chacon, Costa Rica; Manuel Bianchi Gundian, Chile; Gonzalo Escudero, Ecuador; Gabino Fraga, Mexico; Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, El Salvador; Durward V. Sandifer, U. S. A.; and Eomulo Gallegos, Venezuela. Dr. Gallegos resigned, due to ill health, on May 10, 1963, and Daniel Hugo Martins of Uruguay was elected by the Council of the Organization. In new elections on June 3, 1964, all members of the Commission were re-elected, except Eeynaldo Galindo Pohl, who did not run. He was replaced by Carlos Dunshee de Abranches of Brazil.

6 The initial draft statute proposed a full-time Commission meeting ten months a year. The Secretary General's Memorandum pointed out that the cost of such a commission would approach $232,000 in the first year, whereas shorter sessions could limit the budget to $60,000 (C-a-348, op. cit. 169 ft., 181).

7 The statute initially approved by the Council provided for a full-time Chairman, and contained an “incompatibility” or conflict of interest clause. After many of the substantive powers failed to gain approval in the final vote, however, the Council reconsidered these provisions and found them incongruous. At the following meeting on June 8, 1960, the Council amended the statute to delete them.

8 The draft statute called for broad powers to consider individual complaints and to make recommendations to governments concerning needed adjustments in their internal law. One group of countries, led by Ecuador and El Salvador, maintained that the new Commission could hardly promote human rights without these powers, and that Res. VIII demanded the creation of a commission, not a study group. Others, including the U. S., questioned whether hearing individual complaints was not more like “protection” than promotion.

9 The vote on the key provisions was 10-3, with 8 abstentions.

10 Over 2,000 communications relating to specific violations of human rights, and innumerable communications categorized as of an informative nature, are reported by the Commission in four years of existence. Proyecto de Informe Sometido por la Comisi6n Inter-Americana de Derechos Humanos a la Undecima Conferencia Inter-American a, OEA/Ser.Ii/V/II.9, Doc. 18, April, 1964, p. 4.

11 Inter-American Commission on Human Bights. Report on the … First Session, Oct. 3-28, 1960, OEA/SerX/V/II.l, Doc. 32, p. 13.

12 Regulations, Arts. 33-40. See also Eeport on the … Second Session, April 10-26, 1961, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.2, Doc. 24, p. 14.

13 Resolution of Oct. 12, 1960, at the seventh meeting of the First Session.

14 eport on the … First Session, op. cit. 10.

15 Punta del Este, Uruguay, January, 1962, Bes. IX; 56 A.J.I.L. 613 (1962).

16 The lack of a convention was one of the principal impediments to effective international action on behalf of human rights pointed out by the Inter-American Juridical Committee in their study, The Juridical Relationship between Respect for Human Bights and the Exercise of Democracy, May, 1960, CIJ-52.

17 Some of these conventions are: Asylum (Havana, 1928), Political Asylum (Montevideo, 1933), Diplomatic Asylum (Caracas, 1954), Territorial Asylum (Caracas, 1954), Political Bights of Women (Bogotá, 1948), and Civil Bights of Women (Bogotá, 1948).

18 Report on the Situation of Political Prisoners and Their Relatives in Cuba, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.7, Doc. 4, May, 1963, p. 8.

19 Doc. C-a-348, op. cit. 47. But see Doc. C-a-373, op. cit. 22 ff.

20 European Convention, Arts. 30, 31; 45 A.J.I.L. Supp. 24 (1951). Interestingly, a provision in the draft statute imposed limitations on the Commission's power to publish but in the final voting was eliminated together with the others relating to examination of individual complaints.

21 See Report on the … Third Session, Oct. 2-Nov. 4, 1961, OBA/Ser.L/V/II.3, Doc. 32, p. 4; Report on the … Sixth Session, April 16-May 8, 1963, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.7, Doc. 28, p. 16.

22 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.4, Doc. 32, May 22, 1962, pp. 27 ff.

23 Over 1,300 communications were received through May, 1963. 112 were transmitted to the Government of Cuba in 48 separate notes. Only 12 replies were received. Report on … Political Prisoners … in Cuba, op. cit. 1. See also Report on the … Fifth Session, Sept. 24-Oct. 26, 1962, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.5, Doc. 40, p. 16.

24 Op. cit. 63.

25 Report on the … Fifth Session, op. cit. 8, 9.

26 Ibid. 9 ff.

27 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.8, Doe. 5, Nov., 1963, p. 7.

28 Report on the … Fifth Session, op. cit. 12.

29 Report on the … First Special Session, Jan. 3-23, 1963, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.6, Doc. 18, p. 7.

30 The report of the electoral observers was submitted to the Secretary General and to the Government of Nicaragua.

31 Report on the … Seventh Session, Oct. 7-25, 1963, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.8, Doc. 35, pp. 10, 17.

32 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.8, Doc. 15. Gonzalo Escudero, Rapporteur.

33 La Protecci6n de los Derechos Humanos Frente a la Suspensi?n de Garantias o Estado de Sitio. Daniel Martins, Rapporteur. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.9, Doc. 14, April, 1964. See also Secretariat Document: Preliminary Study of the State of Siege and the Protection of Human Eights in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.8, Doc. 6, Sept., 1963.

34 The Relationship Between Respect for Human Rights and the Effective Exercise of Representative Democracy. Durward V. Sandifer, Rapporteur. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.4, Doc. 21, April, 1962.

35 See the reports of the Commission on the work accomplished in each session, and especially the Report on the … Seventh Session, op. cit. 29.