¡Qué hay de nuevo en la Biblioteca!
Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos
Boletín No. 115, Año 8, 2015
SKYPE WHATSAPP FACEBOOK TWITTER CORREO

El derecho a la libertad de pensamiento y expresión en la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos.
Manuel E. Ventura Robles.
En: Jurisprudencia argentina.
Fascículo 12 (2015)



Resumen: El presente artículo comienza introduciendo sobre la importancia que ha venido adquiriendo el tema de la libertad de pensamiento y expresión en la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Se refiere además a la Opinión Consultiva OC-5/85 sobre la Colegiación Obligatoria de Periodistas, y asimismo detalla información sobre la jurisprudencia contenciosa en materia de libertad de pensamiento y expresión.


¿Qué futuro espera al Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos?
Dinah Shelton.
En: Jurisprudencia argentina.
Fascículo 12 (2015)



Resumen: En este artículo, Dinah Shelton abarca información relevante sobre el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos: Su historia, sus funciones y facultades, la Secretaría, la situación de la recepción de medidas cautelares y la admisibilidad de peticiones. La autora concluye el escrito refiriéndose a algunas cuestiones sobre el futuro de la Comisión.


La complejidad del principio Pro Homine.
Zlata Drnas de Clément.
En: Jurisprudencia argentina.
Fascículo 12 (2015)



Resumen: En el presente trabajo se considera el "ambiente" en el que se ha generado y desarrollado el principio pro homine; las variadas percepciones conceptuales del mismo, sus notas características, el rol que cumple en el Sistema de Protección de los Derechos Humanos y los desafíos de futuro que se le presentan.

La emergencia del ius standi de la persona ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos: El ius cogens superveniens y la "materia odiosa".
Rolando E. Gialdino.
En: Jurisprudencia argentina.
Fascículo 12 (2015)



Resumen: Se tratan los siguientes temas: El principio de igualdad como norma de ius cogens, la igualdad de las partes en el proceso como norma de ius cogens derivada del principio de igualdad, las consecuencias que origina la desigualdad de las partes en materia de ius standi en el proceso ante la Comisión IDH, el locus standi in iudicio de la persona ante la Corte IDH, ius cogens Versus ius dispositivum, obligaciones erga omnes, el ius cogens superviens y el derecho intertemporal, entre otras temáticas.

Towards a uniform basis for the right to identity in the normative framework of the American Convention on Human Rights.
Romina I. Sijniensky y Alexander Aizenstatd.
En: Inter-American and European Human Rights Journal.
No. 1 (2014)



Resumen: The right to identity has surfaced in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights mostly in cases dealing with enforced disappearance of children. Although not a right that is independently defined in the Convention, the Court has declared its existence through the interpretation of several other rights. The rights from which identity has been derived have not been uniform and vary from case to case. This lack of uniformity can create difficulties in the future by limiting the applicability of the right to cases of enforced disappearance of children. We propose that in order to have a uniform basis for the right to identity which is not dependent on fact specific situations and does not hinder its possible application in the future to cases not related to children, the right to identity should be derived from Article 11(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights.

The independence and impartiality in the Inter-American Court's jurisprudence: The specific case of judges' arbitral removal.
Gaetano D'Avino, Daniela Fanciullo, Anna Iermano, Angela Martone y Rossana Palladino.
En: Inter-American and European Human Rights Journal.
No. 1 (2014)



Resumen: This work focuses on the independence and impartiality of domestic judges and tribunals, startingfrom a comment on three IACtHR judgments: Chocrón Chocrón v. Venezuela, 1 July 2008; Reverón-Trujillo v. Venezuela, 30 June 2009; Apitz Barbera et al. v. Venezuela, 5 August 2008. As is well known, to ensure due process, Article 8(1) of the ACHR enshrines that every person has the right to a hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. Given the relevance of this guarantee, the so-called "fraudulent res judicata" can result from a trial in which the rules of due process have not been respected, or when judges have not acted with independence and impartiality. Furthermore, Article 27(2) of the ACHR provides for the non-suspension of judicial guarantees essential to the protection of fundamental human rights in state of emergency.

Resuscitating justice: The Inter-American Court confronts the entrenched impunity of national amnesty laws.
Jeffrey Davis.
En: Inter-American and European Human Rights Journal.
No. 1 (2014)



Resumen: Amnesty laws are perhaps the most formidable barrier to accountability for human rights violations in Latin America. This article examines how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) confronted these amnesty laws and the effect of its rulings in a number of cases. It analyses the Barrios Altos case, Almonacid Arellano v. Chile, Gelman v. Peru and Gomes Lund v. Brazil to make the following arguments: (1) the IACtHR established and developed the right to truth through its decisions in these amnesty cases; (2) through these decisions, the IACtHR enables legal accountability in the nations from which these cases arose; and, (3) despite these accomplishments, significant barriers to accountability remain.

Judging the case against same-sex marriage.
Andrew Koppelman.
En: University of Illinois Law Review.
No. 2 (2014)



Resumen: The movement for same-sex marriage has been politically triumphant, but its case is incomplete because the arguments against it have not been understood. Major social change should not occur without addressing the claims made by same-sex marriage opponents. This piece presents and critiques consequentialist and nonconsequentialist arguments against same-sex marriage. The consequentialist arguments rely on claims that legalizing same-sex marriage will lead to disastrous societal and familial effects. The nonconsequentialist arguments rest on claims that marriage is an inherently heterosexual institution. The article concludes that none of these arguments have merit.


HeinOnLine
Database

Human Rights
Law Review

Inter-American and European Human Rights
Journal

Westlaw
International