Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T15:58:29.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Law and Politics in the Inter-American System

The Amnesty Cases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2022

Wayne Sandholtz  and
Mariana Rangel Padilla
Wayne Sandholtz*
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
Mariana Rangel Padilla
Affiliation:
Tecnológico de Monterrey
*
Contact the corresponding author, Wayne Sandholtz, at wayne.sandholtz@usc.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Inter-American Human Rights System takes into account domestic political contexts in ways that sometimes have not been fully recognized. International human rights courts face a tension between the goal of expanding rights and the need to gain legitimacy with domestic constituencies. Cases involving national amnesty laws have posed this dilemma in acute fashion in the Inter-American System. An analysis of those cases and their domestic political contexts shows how the Commission and the Court have taken into account domestic circumstances, the first through the timing of referrals and the second through the Court’s jurisprudence.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Law and Courts , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , Spring 2020 , pp. 151 - 175
Copyright
© 2020 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved.

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.)

Footnotes

The authors are grateful to participants in the Law and Globalization seminar at Yale Law School and in a panel at the Law and Society Association’s 2015 Annual Meeting for helpful discussions of an earlier version of this paper. The article also benefited from the constructive suggestions of Courtney Hillebrecht, Claret Vargas, Laurence Helfer, and three anonymous reviewers. Finally, for their outstanding research assistance, the authors thank Kyle Nothern, Benjamin Cohn, William Chandler, and Derek Belle.

References

Alter, Karen J. 2014. The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J., and Helfer, Laurence R. 2010. “Nature or Nurture? Judicial Lawmaking in the European Court of Justice and the Andean Tribunal of Justice.” International Organization 64 (4): 563–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvira, Gustavo 2013. “Toward a New Amnesty: The Colombian Peace Process and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.” Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 22 (1): 119–44.Google Scholar
Arai-Takahashi, Yutaka. 2013. “The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: A Theoretical Analysis of Strasbourg’s Variable Geometry.” In Constituting Europe: The European Court of Rights in a National, European, and Global Context, ed. Føllesdal, Andreas, Peters, Birgit, and Ulfstein, Geir, 62–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
BBC. 2012. “Bolivia: Regional Group Aligns against OAS, Media, Human Rights Commission.” BBC Worldwide Monitoring Latin America—Political, June 7. Lexis-Nexis. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:55TW-3081-JC8S-C02K-00000-00&context=1516831.Google Scholar
Benvenisti, Eyal 1998–99. “Margin of Appreciation, Consensus, and Universal Standards.” New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 31 (4): 843–54.Google Scholar
Binder, Christina 2011. “The Prohibition of Amnesties by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.” German Law Journal 12 (5–6): 1203–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgorgue-Larsen, Laurence, and de Torres, Amaya Úbeda. 2011. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Case Law and Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burt, Jo-Marie. 2009. “Guilty as Charged: The Trial of Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori for Human Rights Violations.” International Journal of Transitional Justice 3 (3): 384–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavallaro, James L., and Erin Brewer, Stephanie. 2008. “Reevaluating Regional Human Rights Litigation in the Twenty-First Century: The Case of the Inter-American Court.” American Journal of International Law 102:768–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contreras, Pablo 2012. “National Discretion and International Deference in the Restriction of Human Rights: A Comparison between the Jurisprudence of the European and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.” Northwestern University Journal of International Human Rights 11 (1): 28–82.Google Scholar
Dulitzky, Ariel E. 2015a. “An Alternative Approach to the Conventionality Control Doctrine.” AJIL Unbound 109:100–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulitzky, Ariel E. 2015b. “An Inter-American Constitutional Court? The Invention of the Conventionality Control by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.” Texas International Law Journal 50 (1): 45–93.Google Scholar
Dzehtsiarou, Kanstantsin 2011. “European Consensus and the Evolutive Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights Legitimacy and the Future of the European Court of Human Rights.” German Law Journal 12 (10): 1730–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Mark 2009. Necessary Evils: Amnesties and the Search for Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R., and Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 1997. “Toward a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication.” Yale Law Journal 107 (2): 273–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillebrecht, Courtney 2014. “The Power of Human Rights Tribunals: Compliance with the European Court of Human Rights and Domestic Policy Change.” European Journal of International Relations 20 (4): 1100–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillebrecht, Courtney, Huneeus, Alexandra, and Borda, Sandra. 2018. “The Judicialization of Peace.” Harvard International Law Journal 59 (2): 279–330.Google Scholar
Huneeus, Alexandra 2011. “Courts Resisting Courts: Lessons from the Inter-American Court’s Struggle to Enforce Human Rights.” Cornell Internatinal Law Journal 44 (3): 493–534.Google Scholar
Huneeus, Alexandra 2016. “Constitutional Lawyers and the Inter-American Court’s Varied Authority.” Law and Contemporary Problems 79 (1): 179–207.Google Scholar
Laplante, Lisa, and Theidon, Kimberly. 2006. “Transitional Justice in Times of Conflict: Colombia’s Ley de Justicia y Paz.” Michigan Journal of International Law 28 (1): 49–108.Google Scholar
Letsas, George 2013. “The ECHR as a Living Instrument: Its Meaning and Legitimacy.” In Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European, and Global Context, ed. Føllesdal, Andreas, Peters, Birgit, and Ulfstein, Geir, 106–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malarino, Ezequiel 2012. “Judicial Activism, Punitivism, and Supranationalisation: Illiberal and Antidemocratic Tendencies of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.” International Criminal Law Review 12 (4): 665–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mallinder, Louise, and McEvoy, Kieran. 2011. “Rethinking Amnesties: Atrocity, Accountability, and Impunity in Post-conflict Societies.” Contemporary Social Science 6 (1): 107–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuman, Gerald L. 2008. “Import, Export, and Regional Consent in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.” European Journal of International Law 19 (1): 101–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nuño, Alejandra. 2013. “Los Desafíos del Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos: Las OSC Internacionales y el SIDH.” Pensamiento propio 38 (July–December): 287–318.Google Scholar
Organization of American States. 2019. “Mandate and Functions of the Commission.” http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/mandate/functions.asp.Google Scholar
Paúl, Álvaro. 2014. “Decision-Making Process of the Inter-American Court: An Analysis Prompted by the In Vitro Fertilization Case.” ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law 21 (1): 87–130.Google Scholar
Payne, Leigh A., Olsen, Tricia D., and Reiter, Andrew G. 2014. Transitional Justice Database Project. http://www.tjdbproject.com/.Google Scholar
Pelc, Krzysztof J. 2014. “The Politics of Precedent in International Law: A Social Network Application.” 108 (3): 547–64.Google Scholar
Poole, Ross 2009. “Enacting Oblivion.” International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 22 (2): 149–57.Google Scholar
Roht-Arriaza, Naomi, and Gibson, Lauren. 1998. “The Developing Jurisprudence on Amnesty.” Human Rights Quarterly 20 (4): 843–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibert-Fohr, Anja. 2009. Prosecuting Serious Human Rights Violations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serbin, Andrés, and Serbin Pont, Andrei. 2013. “La Política Exterior de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela y el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos Como Obstáculo.” Pensamiento propio 38 (July–December): 235–54.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin 1972. “Toward a Theory of Stare Decisis.” Journal of Legal Studies 1:125–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Martin 1981. Courts: A Comparative and Political Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone Sweet, Alec, and Keller, Helen. 2008. “The Reception of the ECHR in National Legal Orders.” In A Europe of Rights, ed. Keller, Helen and Stone Sweet, Alec, 3–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Venzke, Ingo 2012. How Interpretation Makes International Law: On Semantic Change and Normative Twists. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdugo, Sergio, and Francisco García, José. 2012. “Radiografía al Sistema Interamericano de DD.HH.” Revista actualidad jurídica 25:175–216.Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin, and Venzke, Ingo. 2013. “The Spell of Precedents: Lawmaking in International Courts and Tribunals.” In The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, ed. Romano, Cesare P. R., Alter, Karen J., and Avgerou, Chrisanthi, 504–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Online Appendix supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 468.9 KB