Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T13:15:39.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

19 - The Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Beyond Progressivity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Malcolm Langford
Affiliation:
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, University of Oslo
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights was established in 1979 as ‘an autonomous judicial institution’ of the Organization of American States (‘OAS’), charged with applying and interpreting the American Convention on Human Rights, the principal human rights treaty of the region. With its seat in San José, Costa Rica, it is composed of seven part-time, independent judges nominated in their individual capacity by the States parties to the Convention and elected by secret ballot for a renewable six-year term by an absolute majority vote in the OAS General Assembly. The Court's elected judges must be jurists of the ‘highest moral authority’, of recognised competence in the field of human rights, and possess the qualifications required for the exercise of the highest judicial functions in conformity with the law of the State of which they are nationals or that proposes them as candidates.

As a ‘judicial institution’, the Inter-American Court has both contentious and advisory functions, the jurisdictional boundaries of which it closely guards. Since its inception, the Court has used both functions broadly. It has adopted nineteen advisory opinions since 1982, and adjudicated the various procedural stages (admissibility, merits, reparations, interpretation, compliance) of over seventy individual cases since its first, the renowned Velásquez Rodríguez case, was decided in 1987. Under its contentious function, the Court's judgments on liability and reparations, as well as its issuance of provisional measures, are final and not subject to appeal.

Type
Chapter
Information
Social Rights Jurisprudence
Emerging Trends in International and Comparative Law
, pp. 372 - 408
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

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

Robles, M. E. Ventura, ‘La Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos: la necesidad inmediata de convertirse en un tribunal permanente’ [‘The Inter-American Court of Human Rights: the immediate necessity of conversion into a permanent tribunal’], CEJIL Revista: Debates Sobre Derechos Humanos y el Sistema Interamericano, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2005), pp. 12–22Google Scholar
Melish, T., Protecting Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Inter-American Human Rights System: A Manual on Presenting Claims (Quito: Orville H. Schell, Jr. Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School and CDES, 2002), especially pp. 193–332Google Scholar
Melish, Tara J., ‘A Pyrrhic Victory for Peru's Pensioners: Pensions, Property and the Perversion of Progressivity’, CEJIL Revista: Debates sobre Derechos Humanos y el Sistema Interamericano, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2005), pp. 51–66Google Scholar
Melish, Tara J., ‘Rethinking the “Less as More” Thesis: Supranational Litigation of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Americas’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2006), pp. 171–343Google Scholar
Melish, Tara J., ‘Counter-rejoinder. Justice vs. Justiciability? Normative Neutrality and Technical Precision, The Role of the Lawyer in Supranational Social Rights Litigation’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2006), pp. 385–415Google Scholar
Cavallaro, J. L. & Schaffer, E. J., ‘Less as More: Rethinking Supranational Litigation of Economic and Social Rights in the Americas,’ Hastings Law Journal, Vol. 56, pp. 217 (2005)Google Scholar
Melish, T. J. & Aliverti, A., ‘“Positive Obligations” in the Inter-American Human Rights System’, Interights Bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 3 (2006), pp. 120–22Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×