Misplaced Pages

#153846

43-742: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights ( I/A Court H.R. ) is an international court based in San José, Costa Rica . Together with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights , it was formed by the American Convention on Human Rights , a human rights treaty ratified by members of the Organization of American States (OAS). Pursuant to American Convention, the Inter-American Court works with

86-574: A few Anglophone countries in the Caribbean. The following Latin American nation-builders were concerned to build the rule of law : Simón Bolívar , Antonio José de Sucre , Mariano Moreno , Mariano Gálvez , and Dionisio de Herrera . Trinidad and Tobago signed the convention on 28 May 1991 but suspended its ratification on 26 May 1998 (effective 26 May 1999) over the death penalty . In 1999 under President Alberto Fujimori Peru announced it

129-467: A general amnesty to all those members of the security forces and civilians who were the subject of a complaint, investigation, indictment, trial or conviction, or who were serving prison sentences, for human rights violations committed after May 1980. Prior to the amnesty law being passed, investigations had revealed compromising information. In May 1993, and again in January 1995, some officers from

172-399: A judge, one must be a national of a member state of OAS, a jurist, have the 'highest moral authority', have high competency of human rights law, have '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 of the state that proposes them as candidates'. 'Highest Moral Authority' is loosely defined by

215-574: A push for the OAS to create an independent group in charge of evaluating candidates. Another independent group in charge of overseeing the national processes and ranking the candidates that is separate from OAS is a proposed initiative by scholars to address these criticisms. These would ensure that all candidates have been through two reviews on the National and International level before being able to be elected. Fair representation when it comes to candidates

258-661: A state that has ratified the American Convention or accepted jurisdiction of the Court. Judges are required to recuse themselves from cases involving their home country. States parties are no longer permitted to name a judge ad hoc to their case if a sitting judge is not from their country. If a judge is a national of one of the State Parties to the case, the State Parties can only designate a judge ad hoc if there are inter-state complaints. In order to be nominated as

301-411: A written answer to the application, stating whether it accepts or disputes the facts and claims it contains. Once this answer has been submitted, any of the parties in the case may request the Court president's permission to lodge additional pleadings prior to the commencement of the oral phase. The president sets the date for the start of oral proceedings, for which the Court is considered quorate with

344-567: Is also a point of contention. Scholars have stated that State Parties should strive for equal representation in terms of geographic sub-regions, different ethnic and cultural groups, and female and male judges; however, this should be done without straying from the high standards and qualifications required for candidates. "Highest Moral Authority", a requirement for nomination, is often criticized because its vagueness. The necessary qualifications are not clearly defined and vary from country to country. The minimum age ranges from none to 45 years old and

387-423: Is permitted to rule on the relevance of questions asked and to excuse the person asked the question from replying, unless overruled by the Court. After hearing the witnesses and experts and analyzing the evidence presented, the Court issues its judgment. Its deliberations are conducted in private and, once the judgment has been adopted, it is notified to all the parties involved. If the merits judgment does not cover

430-643: The Barrios Altos neighborhood of Lima , Peru . Members of Grupo Colina , a death squad comprising Peruvian Armed Forces personnel, were later identified as the assailants who killed fifteen individuals, including an eight-year-old child, and injured four others. The victims were reportedly partygoers associated with the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist group Shining Path ( Sendero Luminoso ). Nevertheless, judicial authorities found that they were not terrorists. The massacre came to symbolize

473-557: The Organization of American States (OAS), the court made its judgment of 14 March 2001, finding that the government was in the wrong and ordering compensation be paid to the victims. Because the Peruvian government underwent a change in administration that year, the court agreed to postpone signing the settlement agreement until a new government was elected and had taken office. After the Fujimori government in 2000, Congress repealed

SECTION 10

#1732790970154

516-476: The ACHR as never having never been convicted of a crime, suspended or expelled from the legal profession, or dismissed from public office. Judges are elected by State Parties to the convention from a list of nominated candidates. Each State Party may nominate up to three candidates, but if nominating three, at least one of the three must be a national of a state other than the nominating state. The Secretary General of

559-695: The Amnesty Law. The Barrios Altos case was reopened, and a number of suspects were taken into custody. On 21 March 2001, the Peruvian Attorney General Nelly Calderón presented charges against Fujimori in Congress, accusing him of being a "co-author" of the massacre. She presented evidence that Fujimori, acting in concert with Vladimiro Montesinos , head of the SIN, exercised control over Grupo Colina. The charges alleged that

602-469: The Court by either the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights or a state party. In contrast to the European human rights system , individual citizens of the OAS member states are not allowed to take cases directly to the Court. The following conditions must be met: Proceedings before the Court are divided into written and oral phases. In the written phase, the case application is filed, indicating

645-484: The Court to rule on cases brought before it in which a state party to the convention, and thus has accepted its jurisdiction, is accused of a human rights violation. In addition to ratifying the convention, a state party must voluntarily submit to the Court's jurisdiction for it to be competent to hear a case involving that state. Acceptance of contentious jurisdiction can be given on a blanket basis – to date, Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica,

688-479: The Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela and Uruguay have done so (though Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela have subsequently withdrawn) – or, alternatively, a state can agree to abide by the Court's jurisdiction in a specific, individual case. Under the convention, cases can be referred to

731-464: The I/A Court H.R., the withdrawal would have come into effect the following year. However, the I/A Court H.R. notes that the withdrawal was never legally implemented, and as of its 2017 annual report, the I/A Court H.R. still counted the Dominican Republic as a member. The United States signed but never ratified the American Convention on Human Rights . The court consists of seven judges, held to

774-583: The Inter-American Commission to uphold and promote basic rights and freedoms. It has jurisdiction within around 20 of the 35 member states in the American continent that have taken steps to accede to its authority, the vast majority in Latin America. The court adjudicates claims of human rights violations by governments, and issues advisory opinions on interpretations of certain legal matters. Twenty-nine OAS members are also members of

817-463: The OAS organizes the candidates alphabetically and forwards it to the State Parties. The election consists of a secret ballot, requiring an absolute majority of the State Parties to the convention. Those who receive the most votes are elected. After the Convention came into force on 18 July 1978, the first election of judges took place on 22 May 1979. The new Court first convened on 29 June 1979 at

860-520: The Organization of American States Headquarters in Washington, D.C. , United States. The Court's behaviour has also been criticized. Among other issues, some authors have criticized the politicization of the Court. Furthermore, the process of nomination and election is a subject of criticism. It is not a transparent or accountable process at both the National and International levels. There is

903-809: The Peruvian army stated publicly that members of Grupo Colina were responsible for the Barrios Altos massacre. The officers also stated that the head of the Joint Command of the Armed Forces and of the National Intelligence Service (SIN) had full knowledge of the massacre. Advocates, survivors and victims' relatives filed a suit in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights against the Peruvian government for violation of human rights. Established in 1979 by

SECTION 20

#1732790970154

946-480: The Peruvian government submitted a request for the extradition of Fujimori from Japan; among the crimes it cited was the Barrios Altos massacre. Initially Japan had resisted extradition because Fujimori's parents had emigrated to Peru from Japan and it considered him a national of Japan. Its laws prohibited extradition of nationals; in addition, Japan and Peru did not then have an extradition agreement. Peru finally gained his extradition when Fujimori traveled to Chile. He

989-514: The applicable reparations for the case, they must be determined at a separate hearing or through some other procedure as decided on by the Court. The reparations the Court orders can be both monetary and non-monetary in nature. The most direct form of redress are cash compensation payments extended to the victims or their next-of-kin. However, the state can also be required to grant benefits in kind, to offer public recognition of its responsibility, to take steps to prevent similar violations occurring in

1032-470: The case, the government of Peru agreed to pay USD $ 3.3 million in compensation to the four survivors and the relatives of the fifteen people murdered. It waited until the new government had been elected to sign the ruling later that year. On 13 September 2001, Supreme Court Justice José Luis Lecaros issued an international warrant to Interpol for the arrest of Fujimori, then living in Japan . In August 2003,

1075-436: The evening of 3 November 1991, a neighborhood barbecue was being held at 840 Jirón Huanta to collect funds to repair the building. People from the community were gathered on the first floor. At approximately 23:30, six heavily armed individuals burst into the building. They had arrived in two vehicles, found to have been stolen. These were said to be equipped with police lights and sirens, which were turned off when they reached

1118-447: The facts of the case, the plaintiffs, the evidence and witnesses the applicant plans to present at trial, and the claims for redress and costs. If the application is ruled admissible by the Court's secretary, notice thereof is served on the judges, the state or the commission (depending on who lodged the application), the victims or their next-of-kin, the other member states, and OAS headquarters. For 30 days following notification, any of

1161-447: The family of one of the victims. It also required Peru: While the Court's decisions admit no appeal, parties can lodge requests for interpretation with the Court secretary within 90 days of judgment being issued. When possible, requests for interpretation are heard by the same panel of judges that ruled on the merits. The Court's advisory function enables it to respond to consultations submitted by OAS agencies and member states regarding

1204-524: The future, and other forms of non-monetary compensation. For example, in its November 2001 judgment in the Barrios Altos case – dealing with the massacre in Lima , Peru , of 15 people at the hands of the state-sponsored Colina Group death squad in November 1991 – the Court ordered payments of US$ 175,000 for the four survivors and for the next-of-kin of the murdered victims and a payment of $ 250,000 for

1247-520: The group acted under Fujimori's express orders or consent, and that the formation and functioning of the Colina group was part of an overall counter-insurgency policy. According to the report, Fujimori went to SIN headquarters to celebrate with intelligence officers after the massacre took place. As a result of the August 2001 ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of the OAS, which had heard

1290-502: The highest moral judgement who have a high competency in human rights law. These judges are elected to six-year terms by the OAS General Assembly ; each judge may be reelected for an additional six-year term. Recent policy changes state, when serving on the court, judges are expected to act as individuals, not representing their state. They must be OAS member states' nationals; however, they do not need to be individuals of

1333-745: The interpretation of the convention or other instruments governing human rights in the Americas; it also empowers it to give advice on domestic laws and proposed legislation, and to clarify whether or not they are compatible with the convention's provisions. This advisory jurisdiction is available to all OAS member states, not only those that have ratified the convention and accepted the Court's adjudicatory function. The Court's replies to these consultations are published separately from its contentious judgments, as advisory opinions . The American Convention on Human Rights entered into force in 1978. All Latin American countries but Cuba are members, as are Suriname and

Inter-American Court of Human Rights - Misplaced Pages Continue

1376-491: The investigation again nor publish the senatorial committee's preliminary findings. Judicial authorities were unable to launch an investigation of the incident until April 1995, at which time the military courts responded by filing a petition before the Supreme Court for jurisdiction over the case. Before the Court ruled on the petition, the case was effectively closed by Congress' passage of law No. 26479, which granted

1419-426: The location. The assailants, who were said to range from 25 to 30 years of age, had their faces covered with balaclava masks and ordered the victims to lie on the floor. They fired at them for about two minutes, killing 15, including an eight-year-old boy, and seriously wounding another four. One of the injured was permanently disabled. During their investigation, the police found 111 cartridges and 33 bullets of

1462-411: The number of years of experience ranges from 10 to 15 years and only Paraguay requires candidates to have a PhD. Some of the latest criticisms come from Peru and Venezuela. Venezuela subsequently withdrew from the system after President Hugo Chávez declared the court's decision to rule Venezuela guilty of holding a prisoner in inhumane jail conditions as invalid. Up to then, Trinidad and Tobago had been

1505-636: The only state to withdraw. Peru tried to do so, but did not follow the appropriate procedure. International court Too Many Requests If you report this error to the Wikimedia System Administrators, please include the details below. Request from 172.68.168.226 via cp1108 cp1108, Varnish XID 258083078 Upstream caches: cp1108 int Error: 429, Too Many Requests at Thu, 28 Nov 2024 10:49:30 GMT Barrios Altos massacre Attacks and Incidents Massacres The Barrios Altos massacre occurred on 3 November 1991 in

1548-416: The parties in the case may submit a brief containing preliminary objections to the application. If it deems necessary, the Court can convene a hearing to deal with the preliminary objections. Otherwise, in the interests of procedural economy , it can deal with the parties' preliminary objections and the merits of the case at the same hearing. Within 60 days following notification, the respondent must supply

1591-407: The presence of five judges. During the oral phase, the judges may ask any question they see fit of any of the persons appearing before them. Witnesses, expert witnesses, and other persons admitted to the proceedings may, at the president's discretion, be questioned by the representatives of the commission or the state, or by the victims, their next-of-kin, or their agents, as applicable. The president

1634-488: The same caliber at the scene. They determined the assailants had used sub-machine guns equipped with silencers . Judicial investigations and newspaper reports revealed that those involved worked for military intelligence; they were members of the Grupo Colina , which was known for conducting an anti-terrorist program including direct attacks on suspects. The goal was to attack a meeting of Shining Path rebels, which

1677-536: The wider-scale International Criminal Court . The Organization of American States established the Court in 1979 to enforce and interpret the provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights . Its two main functions are thus adjudicatory and advisory. Under the former, it hears and rules on the specific cases of human rights violations referred to it. Under the latter, it issues opinions on matters of legal interpretation brought to its attention by other OAS bodies or member states. The adjudicatory function requires

1720-486: The widespread human rights abuses that occurred during the presidency of Alberto Fujimori . In August 2001, following a ruling by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights , the Peruvian government agreed to pay $ 3.3 million in compensation to the victims and their families. The case was also among those examined by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission after Fujimori's government fell in 2000. The Barrios Altos massacre

1763-607: Was being held at the same time on the second floor of the same building. Several weeks later, Congress convened an investigation committee to look into the massacre . In December, the Committee conducted an inspection of the building where the events took place, interviewed four people and performed other tasks. It was unable to complete its investigation, because of Fujimori's " palace coup " on 5 April, 1992, in which he dissolved Congress. The Democratic Constitutional Congress elected in its place in November 1992 did not take up

Inter-American Court of Human Rights - Misplaced Pages Continue

1806-509: Was one of the crimes cited in the request for Fujimori's extradition from Japan to Peru in 2003. On 20 September 2007, he was eventually extradited from Chile to Peru to stand trial for the massacre, among other charges. Peru had been struggling to control the rebellion by the group known as Shining Path . For more than a decade, they had committed acts of terrorism against government officials, community leaders and innocent bystanders: assassinations , car bombings and other violence. On

1849-535: Was withdrawing its acceptance of the Court's jurisdiction . This decision was reversed by the transitional government of Valentín Paniagua in 2001. Venezuela withdrew from the convention in 2013 under the Nicolás Maduro government. On 15 May 2019, the National Assembly (opposition Guaidó government) nullified the withdrawal. The Dominican Republic stated in 2014 that it was withdrawing from

#153846