Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Is the Inter-American Human Rights System Biased? A Quantitative Analysis of Regional Human Rights Litigation in the Americas Cover

Is the Inter-American Human Rights System Biased? A Quantitative Analysis of Regional Human Rights Litigation in the Americas

By: Simon Zschirnt  
Open Access
|Feb 2018

References

  1. American Convention on Human Rights (Nov. 22, 1969). OAS Treaty Series No. 36.
  2. ARRIAGADA, Milenko B.G. The New Legitimacy Challenges of Adjudication at the Inter-American Human Rights System in the Context of Latin American Democracies. SJD dissertation, American University, 2015.
  3. BIRON, Carey L. Controversial Inter-American Reforms Process to Continue. [online]. Available at: <http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/03/controversial-inter-american-reforms-process-to-continue/>
  4. BOYLE, Elizabeth H. and THOMPSON, Melissa. National Politics and Resort to the European Commission on Human Rights. Law & Society Review, 2001, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 321–44.10.2307/3185405
  5. BURGORGUE-LARSEN, Laurence and ÚBEDA de TORRES, Amaya. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Case Law and Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.10.1353/hrq.2011.0007
  6. CAROZZA, Paolo. The Anglo-Latin Divide and the Future of the Inter-American System of Human Rights. Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law, 2015, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 153–70.
  7. CAVALLARO, James L. and SCHAFFER, Emily J. Less as More: Rethinking Supranational Litigation of Economic and Social Rights in the Americas. Hastings Law Journal, 2004, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 217–82.
  8. CAVALLARO, James L. and BREWER, Stephanie E. Reevaluating Regional Human Rights Litigation in the 21st Century: The Case of the Inter-American Court. American Journal of International Law, 2008, vol. 102, no. 4, pp. 768–827.10.2307/20456681
  9. Chipping at the Foundations. [online]. Available at: <http://www.economist.com/node/21556599>
  10. CONCEPCIÓN, Natasha P. The Legal Implications of Trinidad & Tobago’s Withdrawal from the American Convention on Human Rights. American University International Law Review, 2001, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 847–90.
  11. Correa Calls for New Inter-American Human Rights System. [online]. Available at: <https://www.efe.com/efe/english/life/correa-calls-for-new-inter-american-human-rights-system/50000263-3064355>
  12. DULITZKY, Ariel E. Too Little, Too Late: The Pace of Adjudication of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Loyola of Los Angeles International & Comparative Law Review, 2013, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 131–208.
  13. EPSTEIN, David et al. Democratic Transitions. American Journal of Political Science, 2006, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 551–69.10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00201.x
  14. GROSSMAN, Claudio. Freedom of Expression in the Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights. Nova Law Review, 2001, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 411–42.
  15. GROSSMAN, Claudio. The Inter-American System of Human Rights: Challenges for the Future. Indiana Law Journal, 2008, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 1267–82.
  16. GROSSMAN, Claudio. Challenges to Freedom of Expression Within the Inter-American System: A Jurisprudential Analysis. Human Rights Quarterly, 2012, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 361–403.10.1353/hrq.2012.0026
  17. HELFER, Laurence R. Overlegalizing Human Rights: International Relations Theory and the Commonwealth Caribbean Backlash against Human Rights Regimes. Columbia Law Review, 2002, vol. 102, no. 7, pp. 1832–1911.10.2307/1123662
  18. HOLMUND, Caroline. Why Latin America Is Refusing to Follow the US on Human Rights. [online]. Available at: <https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2014/04/10/why-latin-america-is-refusing-to-follow-the-us-on-human-rights/>
  19. INGLEHART, Ronald and WELZEL, Christian. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
  20. INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS. The Death Penalty in the Inter-American Human Rights System: From Restrictions to Abolition. Washington: Organization of American States, 2011.
  21. MORAVCSIK, Andrew. The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe. International Organization, 2000, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 217–52.10.1162/002081800551163
  22. NEUMAN, Gerald L. Import, Export, and Regional Consent in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. European Journal of International Law, 2008, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 101–23. OAS Concludes Formal Inter-American Human Rights “Strengthening” Process, but Dialogue Continues on Contentious Reforms. [online]. Available at: <http://www.ijrcenter.org/2013/03/24/oas-concludes-formal-inter-american-human-rights-strengthening-process-but-dialogue-continues-on-contentious-reforms/>10.1093/ejil/chn002
  23. OPPENHEIMER, Andrés. Trump May Weaken OAS — And Efforts to Restore Democracy in Venezuela. [online]. Available at: <http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/andres-oppenheimer/article138719758.html>
  24. PICQ, Manuela. Is the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Too Progressive? [online]. Available at: <http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/06/2012658344220937.html>
  25. PINTO, Mónica. The Crisis of the Inter-American System. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, 2013, vol. 107, pp. 127–29.10.5305/procannmeetasil.107.0127
  26. President Correa: We Need to Create a Human Rights System for Latin America. [online]. Available at: <http://www.andes.info.ec/en/news/president-correa-we-need-create-human-rights-system-latin-america.html>
  27. PRZEWORSKI, Adam et al. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.10.1017/CBO9780511804946
  28. RIVERA JUARISTI, Francisco J. US Exceptionalism and the Strengthening Process of the Inter-American Human Rights System. Human Rights Brief, 2013, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 19–25.
  29. ROGIN, Josh. House Panel Votes to Defund the OAS. [online]. Available at: <http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/07/20/house-panel-votes-to-defund-the-oas/>
  30. RUIZ-CHIRIBOGA, Oswaldo R. Is Ecuador That Wrong? Analyzing the Ecuadorian Proposals Concerning the Special Rapporteurship on Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Human Rights Brief, 2013, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 26–33.10.2139/ssrn.2034375
  31. RUIZ-CHIRIBOGA, Oswaldo R. The American Convention and the Protocol of San Salvador: Two Intertwined Treaties. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 2013, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 156–83.10.1177/016934411303100203
  32. Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Mar. 18, 2013). Reprinted in Basic Documents in the Inter-American System, 2011.
  33. SHAVER, Lea. The Inter-American Human Rights System: An Effective Institution for Regional Rights Protection? Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 2010, vol. 9, no. 4, p. 639–76.
  34. SHELTON, Dinah. The Rules and Reality of Petition Procedures in the Inter-American Human Rights System. Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law, 2015, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–28.
  35. Statute of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Oct. 31, 1979). Reprinted in Basic Documents in the Inter-American System, 2011.
  36. WHITE, Robin C.A. and BOUSSIAKOU, Iris. Separate Opinions in the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Law Review, 2009, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 47–51.10.1093/hrlr/ngn033
  37. WILSON, Richard J. The United States’ Position on the Death Penalty in the Inter-American Human Rights System. Santa Clara Law Review, 2002, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 1159–90.
  38. ZSCHIRNT, Simon and MENALDO, Mark. International Insurance? Democratic Consolidation and Support for International Human Rights Regimes. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 2014, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 452–75.10.1093/ijtj/iju018
  39. Andrea Mortlock, Case 12.534, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 63/08, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.134, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2009).
  40. ‘Baby Boy,’ Case 2141, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 23/81, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.54, doc. 9 rev. 1 (1981).
  41. Benedict Jacob, Case 12.158, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 56/02, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.117, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2003).
  42. Chad Roger Goodman, Case 12.265, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 78/07, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.130, doc. 22 rev. 1 (2007).
  43. Coard et al., Case 10.951, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 109/99, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, doc. 6 rev. 1 (1999).
  44. Community of the Rio Negro of the Maya Achi Indigenous People and its Members, Case 12.649, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 86/10, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2011).
  45. Dave Sewell, Case 12.347, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 76/02, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.117, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2003).
  46. Davlin Morris, Case 3552, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 60/82, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.61, doc. 22 rev. 1 (1983).
  47. Denton Aitken, Case 12.275, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 58/02, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.117, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2003).
  48. Desmond McKenzie et al., Case 12.023, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 41/00, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, doc. 6 rev. 1 (1999).
  49. Donnason Knights, Case 12.028, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 47/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  50. Earl Pratt, Case 9054, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 13/84, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 10 rev. 1 (1985).
  51. Eduardo Kimel, Case 12.450, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 111/06, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.130, doc. 22 rev. 1 (2007).
  52. Emilio Palacio, Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, Carlos Pérez Barriga, and César Pérez Bar-riga, Precautionary Measures 406/11, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.147, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2013).
  53. Grand Chief Michael Mitchell, Case 12.435, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 61/08, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.134, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2009).
  54. Haitian Interdiction, Case 10.675, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 51/96, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.95, doc. 7 rev. 1 (1997).
  55. Haniff Hilaire et al., Case 11.816, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 43/98, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, doc. 6 rev. 1 (1999).
  56. Jehovah’s Witnesses, Case 2137, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 31/78, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.47, doc. 13 rev. 1 (1979).
  57. Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) et al., Case 12.626, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 80/11, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 69 rev. 1 (2011).
  58. Jorge Odir Miranda Cortez et al., Case 12.249, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 27/09, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 51 corr. 1 (2009).
  59. Joseph Thomas, Case 12.183, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 127/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.114, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2002).
  60. Juan Pablo Olmedo Bustos et al., Case 11.803, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 31/98, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.102, doc. 6 rev. 1 (1999).
  61. Karen Atala and Daughters, Case 12.502, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 139/09, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 51 corr. 1 (2009).
  62. Kuna Indigenous People of Madungandi and Embera Indigenous People of Bayano and their Members, Case 12.354, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 125/12, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.147, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2013).
  63. Lennox Boyce et al., Case 12.480, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 03/06, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.127, doc. 4 rev. 1 (2007).
  64. Leroy Lamey et al., Case 11.826, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 49/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  65. Lyndon Champagnie, Case 7505, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 27/86, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.68, doc. 8 rev. 1 (1986).
  66. Marcelino Hanríquez et al., Case 11.784, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 73/00, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  67. Maria Eugenia Morales de Sierra, Case 11.625, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 4/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  68. Mary and Carrie Dann, Case 11.140, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 75/02, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.117, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2003).
  69. Mauricio Herrera Ulloa, Case 12.367, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 64/02, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118, doc. 5 rev. 2 (2003).
  70. Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District, Case 12.053, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 40/04, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.122, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2005).
  71. Michael Edwards et al., Case 12.067, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 48/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  72. Milton García Fajardo et al., Case 11.381, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 100/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.114, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2002).
  73. National Association of Ex-Employees of the Peruvian Social Security Institute et al., Case 12.670, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 38/09, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 51 corr. 1 (2009).
  74. Noel Riley, Case 3102, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 25/81, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.54, doc. 9 rev. 1 (1981).
  75. Oscar Elías Biscet et al., Case 12.476, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 67/06, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.127, doc. 4 rev. 1 (2007).
  76. Paul Lallion, Case 11.765, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 55/02, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.117, doc. 1 rev. 1 (2003).
  77. Pedro Peredo Valderrama, Case 11.103, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 42/00, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, doc. 6 rev. 1 (1999).
  78. Peter Cash, Case 12.231, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 12/14, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.150, doc. 16 rev. 1 (2014).
  79. Rafael Ferrer-Mazorra et al., Case 9903, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 51/01, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  80. Residents of the Village of Chichupac and Neighboring Communities, Case 12.788, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 100/14, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.150, doc. 16 rev. 1 (2015).
  81. Ricardo Israel Zipper, Case 12.470, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 110/09, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 51 corr. 1 (2009).
  82. Roosevelt Edwards, Case 7604, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 7/84, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.63, doc. 10 rev. 1 (1984).
  83. Rudolph Baptiste, Case 11.743, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 38/00, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.111, doc. 20 rev. 1 (2001).
  84. Statehood Solidarity Committee, Case 11.204, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 98/03, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118, doc. 5 rev. 2 (2003).
  85. Tyrone Dacosta Cadogan, Case 12.645, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 60/08, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.134, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2009).
  86. Undocumented Workers, Case 12.834, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 50/16, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.159 (2016).
  87. Wayne Smith, Hugo Armendariz et al., Case 12.562, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 81/10, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2011).
  88. Wesley Cuthbert, Case 9190, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 28/86, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.68, doc. 8 rev. 1 (1986).
  89. Yean and Bosico Children, Case 12.189, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 30/03, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118, doc. 5 rev. 2 (2003).
  90. Granier et al. (Radio Caracas Televisión) v. Venezuela, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 293 (June 22, 2015).
  91. Juridical Condition and Rights of the Undocumented Migrants, Advisory Opinion, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) No. 18 (Sept. 17, 2003).
  92. López Mendoza v. Venezuela, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 233 (Sept. 11, 2011).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2018-0002 | Journal eISSN: 2464-6601 | Journal ISSN: 12138770
Language: English
Page range: 51 - 81
Published on: Feb 9, 2018
Published by: Palacký University Olomouc
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2018 Simon Zschirnt, published by Palacký University Olomouc
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.