Message of the President of the IACtHR, Judge Nancy Hernández López, during the Inauguration of the 2025 Inter-American Judicial Year
I. Introduction
As is customary, I am addressing you on the Opening Ceremony of the Inter-American Judicial Year. This ceremony marks the beginning of the Court’s work for 2025. This practice was consolidated to promote transparency, dialog and accountability in the region.
First off, I would like to sincerely thank my colleagues, the judges of this Court, the Registrar and Deputy Registrar, as well as the attorneys and personnel that assist us in our work. Your dedication has been fundamental during an extraordinary year, especially with regards to the jurisdictional function, which was particularly demanding.
We must also recognize the work of the outgoing judges, Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor and Humberto Sierra Porto, who have been at the service of inter-American justice for the last 12 years. Both leave a huge mark on our institution and will be deeply missed.
Today we also celebrate and welcome the new judges, Diego Moreno and Alberto Borea Odría. Two noted jurists who, with their valuable perspectives and experiences, will undoubtedly strengthen the work of the Court. Welcome colleagues, I greet and congratulate you and your families who are here with us today. My best wishes for this new role.
Additionally, I would like to congratulate our colleague Ricardo Pérez Manrique, who has been reelected for a new period, a recognition of his exceptional quality as a professional and his commitment to the values of this institution.
We embrace this new year by reaffirming our commitment to the highest principles that guide our work: independence, impartiality and integrity; with the clarity that our main mandate is to defend and effectively protect the rights and freedoms recognized in the American Convention on Human Rights.
Firstly, I would like to focus on the Court’s jurisdictional function, its core task, which was one of the priorities of the directive table during the last year and that allowed for the creation of very relevant standards and to advance its jurisprudence, while resolving a record number of contentious cases and an unprecedented number of advisory opinions of utmost importance to the region.
Secondly, I would like to mention the upcoming themes and cases that the Court will schedule for 2025, considering those submitted by the Inter-American Commission.
Lastly, I would like to share some final thoughts.
In the interest of time, I will leave out the comprehensive details of the Court’s work for the annual written report submitted to the General Assembly of the Organization of American States.
Regarding the jurisdictional work of the Court, 2024 was particularly intense. The Court issued approximately 20% more judgments on merits; on monitoring compliance with judgment, full or partial compliance or progress on compliance was declared in more than 100 reparation measures for 12 States: Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay.
All of these advances in compliance with judgment deserve recognition. They are not easy to comply with in the short term due to the extent of the reparations and in some cases compensation. As an example of the magnitude of the cases before this Court, in the case of Teachers of Chañaral, for which compliance was completed last year, almost 1,000 teachers received compensation as remediation for the injustices committed during the Chilean dictatorship. This is an extraordinary effort that required millions in funds, undoubtedly an example of the impact of the resolutions of this Court, but mainly an example of the commitment and coherence of the current authorities with the Inter-American System.
Moreover, the Court held sessions for 22 weeks, four outside of its seat, in Brazil and Barbados, and held 15 hearings and 37 deliberations of judgments on merits. Several hearings on monitoring of compliance with judgment were also held in Paraguay, Colombia, Guatemala and Chile.
Key among our work sessions were the historical hearings on the Advisory Opinion on Climate Emergency held in Barbados, Manaos and Brasilia, which had an unprecedented participation (263 written observations, 161 organizations and 9 States).
It was an intersectional, interdisciplinary and intergenerational dialog of historical proportions for an international Court. We witnessed the participation of indigenous peoples from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego, as well as the representation of all generations, including children, adolescents, adults and seniors from several regions; academics and members of civil society; all united in a single voice of extreme concern about the existential threat that climate change represents.
Hearings were also held on the Advisory Opinion on the Right to Care and deliberation began in the Advisory Opinion on the Responsibility of States Regarding Private Arms Manufacturing Companies. Both topics are new and have a great impact on the region.
The Court dedicated six weeks of work to these three advisory opinions.
On-site hearings and activities are certainly key to strengthening access to justice and transcending the geographical barriers to bring justice closer to the States and to the most vulnerable populations.
Direct contact in the territory of the States and other activities of the Court were made possible thanks to the economic cooperation of: Sweden, the European Commission, Norway, Switzerland, Spain, the Netherlands, Germany and France, who I would like to thank on behalf of the Court for their support of our work through a respectful relationship, without conditioning, with the sole purpose of supporting inter-American justice. The collaboration of the States in the region and the local organizations has also been key to the success of these activities.
In the hearings in the Advisory Opinion on Climate Change, among the hundreds of organizations that participated, I was pleasantly surprised to see that two brilliant interventions were prepared by very young adolescents. At an age where they should be enjoying games with friends, these youths assumed the burden of adults. They learned their rights from a young age, which empowered them to capably defend themselves with composure, as demonstrated in the hearings. Their participation gives a clear message: the youth want to be heard and to be part of the solution in the major human rights topics in our region.
Accordingly, the Court took on a project to create the first “American Convention on Human Rights with commentary and illustrations by and for children and adolescents” in a version commentated and intervened exclusively by them.
This project, which is the result of workshops held at public and private schools, with active participation of the whole region, is an example that justice can also be inclusive and visionary.
On behalf of the Court, I would like to thank the Commission for the Improvement of the Justice Administration of the Judicial Branch of Costa Rica and Fundación Paniamor for their guidance and support in this process. I would also like to recognize the work of Javier Mariezcurrena and the Court’s international cooperation team.
I am pleased to present a short two-minute video by the students who participated. I would like to express my gratitude to the students and personnel of Liceo Elias Leiva Quirós of Cartago, who participated in the project and are here today.
This American Convention commentated and illustrated by children and adolescents is available as of today as teaching material for the whole region on the Court’s website. You can also view it using the QR code provided to you at the beginning.
As part of our 45th Anniversary, a regional photography contest was organized with the goal of creating a cultural projection of the various realities on human rights matters experienced in the continent. During this ceremony our Director of Communications will announce the winners.
II. New standards for 2024.
Regarding the new standards for 2024, I would like to highlight some of the main contributions to the jurisprudence of the Court, which covered topics such as the right to participate in government and democracy, electoral integrity, gender, femicides within the family environment, reproductive health, racial discrimination, access to information and the right to the truth, access to justice, the rights of indigenous peoples, judicial guarantees, economic, social and cultural rights, and grave human rights violations.
Right to participate in government and democracy
On the right to participate in government and democracy, for several years now the weakening of democracy in the region has led the Court to receive cases regarding political rights.
During 2024, the Court issued relevant decisions in the cases of Capriles v. Venezuela and Gadea v. Nicaragua, which represent significant advances in the jurisprudence on electoral processes and the right to participate in government. For the first time, the Court referred to the concept of
In the case of Capriles v. Venezuela, the Court proved that the electoral process took place in a context of progressive weakening of the separation of powers, of the independence of the National Electoral Council (NEC) and the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). In this case, the Court confirmed the excessive use of the State’s apparatus during the electoral process, which favored the official candidate. Moreover, the Court established that the actions of the State constituted an abandonment of the fundamental principles of the state of law, insofar as it ignored the rules contemplated in the domestic body of law to limit power and make democracy possible.
In the case of Gadea, the Court also confirmed that the lack of integrity of the electoral process favored the reelection of the president, and it also considered that the Supreme Court of Justice and the Supreme Electoral Court showed partiality and did not guarantee an effective judicial remedy to review the decisions that questioned the irregularities of the process.
In both cases relevant standards were established to guarantee electoral integrity. These include: a) transparency in the financing of campaigns and the counting of votes with the participation of independent observers; b) equal access to mass media; c) preventing undue use of State resources in favor of one candidate; and d) impartiality and transparency of the electoral bodies and effective remedies, among other.
These cases remind us of the importance of autonomous and independent electoral bodies. Most importantly, they portray that the deterioration of democracy does not happen overnight, but in small and progressive strategic changes that seek to favor the concentration of power and impunity.
Gender, femicides and reproductive health
On gender, the Court has a solid jurisprudence regarding the obligations of the States.
During 2024, the Court had the opportunity of delving deeper into due diligence strengthened in the cases of femicides, highlighting the imperative need to apply an adequate gender perspective in all judicial and administrative acts. In these decisions clear guidelines were established for the actions of the authorities at all levels, also confirming the relevance of raising awareness of and rejecting the gender stereotypes that perpetuate discrimination and violence.
Moreover, for the first time the Court ruled on violence against women within the family environment, confirming that the State must act with strengthened due diligence in investigations and the possibility that inaction by the State in cases of domestic violence generates international responsibility.
In addition, in the case of Beatriz et al. v. El Salvador, the Court reiterated its jurisprudence on obstetric violence, noting that it is a specific type of gender violence exercised during pregnancy, delivery and postpartum care through access to healthcare services.
Indigenous Peoples in isolation
This year the Court heard for the first time a case related to indigenous peoples in isolation, meaning that they have no contact with the rest of the population, setting a key precedent on the protection of these especially vulnerable groups.
Moreover, it addressed new topics on free and informed prior consultation, evaluating scenarios in which the administrative or legislative measures proposed by the State entailed the execution of investment projects outside of the territory but that affect it directly, examining for the first time scenarios of non-participation in the consultation by decision of the community.
These decisions are milestones in the protection of the human rights of indigenous and tribal peoples, since they recognize the complexity of their self-determination in diverse contexts, reinforcing the need to adopt more inclusive approaches.
Labor rights and economic, social, cultural and environmental rights
Regarding labor rights, economic, social, cultural and environmental rights, the Court has continued to strengthen its jurisprudence. During the past year the Court has emphasized again the importance of effective access to justice in labor contexts. For example, in the case of SUTECASA v. Peru, in which the freedom of association and protection of the rights of employees were analyzed, including those of elderly persons and their right to access to justice without discrimination.
Principle of equality and non-discrimination
The jurisprudence of the Court has advanced significantly in the protection of the principle of equality and non-discrimination, establishing specific standards for diverse groups in vulnerable conditions, such as detained adolescents, disabled persons, indigenous peoples and women.
Regarding non-discrimination for disability, in the case of Aguirre Magaña v. El Salvador the Court reiterated the States’ obligation to adopt measures to eliminate the discrimination of disabled persons, emphasizing the crucial role of access to justice as mechanism to eradicate structural discrimination and to guarantee the full integration of these individuals into society.
Regarding non-discrimination based on race and socioeconomic condition, in the case of Leite de Souza et al. v. Brazil, the Court reiterated its jurisprudence on the prohibition to discriminate based on race and poverty conditions. In this regard, it referred to how prejudices and stereotypes affect the objectivity of State officers in charge of investigating claims, since these affect their perception when determining whether an act of violence occurred or not, in their evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and the victim.
Moreover, the Court analyzed situations of structural racial discrimination against black persons and discrimination in the framework of protection of the right to equality before the law in situations of violence against women within families.
Grave human rights violations
Regarding grave human rights violations, unfortunately we continue hearing cases related to State violence. Last year, the Court heard cases that reflect this painful truth, including forced disappearances in the cases of Cuellar Sandoval et al. v. Ecuador, Ubaté and Bogotá v. Colombia, and Pérez Lucas et al. v. Guatemala, in which the persistence of this phenomenon and its devastating consequences were analyzed.
In addition to applying its extensive jurisprudence, the Court has advanced the standards by addressing the differentiated impact on the women who search for the disappeared persons, as well as children and adolescents, and by recognizing the serious emotional and social effects endured by the victims’ next of kin.
Moreover, in the cases of Reyes Mantilla et al. v. Ecuador and Poggioli Pérez v. Venezuela the Court considered arbitrary and illegal detentions.
Unfortunately, forced disappearances, arbitrary detentions and torture continue to be open wounds in our region.
In this context, international law has been key to conceptualizing and dealing with these violations, advancing on standards that seek to address not only the responsibility of States but also the growing role of non-State actors and organized crime.
Progress on the topic of forced disappearances that is worth noting and was recently recognized by the Court is the effort of the Public Prosecutor's Office and the National Search Commission of El Salvador, who were able to find José Adrián Rochac Hernández alive after identifying him through a DNA test.
Judicial guarantees
On the topic of judicial guarantees, particularly impunity, in the case of Galetovic Sapunar v. Chile, the Court determined that in situations where the facts that resulted in the dispute occurred during authoritarian regimes or conditions that limited access to justice, it is of utmost importance for the judicial authorities to adopt an approach that takes into account those structural limitations. Thus, in certain contexts domestic courts must consider the specific circumstances surrounding a case by analyzing procedural matters such as extinctive prescription, particularly in cases of grave human rights violations.
Moreover, in the case of Vega González, it also noted the importance of proportionality of the sentences in grave human rights violations.
In other cases already heard, to be notified soon, the Court addressed aspects related to the situation of detained adolescents, establishing specific standards on this matter for the first time; regarding equality and non-discrimination, it analyzed the application of standards of strengthened due diligence in the investigation of complaints of racial discrimination of black people.
These and other relevant cases from the past year allowed the Court to advance its standards significantly, which over the years have demonstrated their capacity to generate a transforming impact on the body of law and the politics of the region, not only because they provide reparation for specific human rights violations but also act as catalysts for the evolution of democratic systems and the consolidation of the rule of law.
There are many relevant standards that were issued but that I’m not mentioning because of the time; however, in each case there are stories of transformed lives. Each case represents a person, family or community that has found a voice in this Court and hope to achieve reparation and justice.
III. Aspects of the 2025 Agenda
The agenda for 2025 will also be intense. Due to the transition in the composition of the judges, the Court will continue deliberating judgments and advisory opinions with the previous composition for a few months, while also hearing the full agenda of cases for this year.
This judicial year includes 11 sessions to be held over the next 12 months. We are planning to hold sessions in Guatemala and Paraguay and hold hearings on monitoring compliance with judgment in Bolivia and Chile, confirming our mission to be close to the communities in greatest need of the support of inter-American justice. I would like to thank those States for allowing the jurisdictional work to take place in their territory.
In 2025 the Court will hear cases related to the protection of detained persons, or in which there is an alleged excessive use of police force in contexts of social protests, gender violence, mainly in institutional contexts such as the raping of indigenous women, executions and forced sterilizations. Unfortunately, violence against women and vulnerable populations has been intensifying in the region, reaching alarming levels. We will also hear cases in which there is an alleged lack of due diligence in the investigation of extrajudicial killings, matters on indigenous peoples, rape of an elderly woman by members of the army, among other.
In addition, the Court received a new request for an advisory opinion, filed by Guatemala, raising the key question whether States are obligated to promote democracy as a human right protected under the American Convention. The advisory opinion seeks to clarify the specific obligations of States to promote and protect representative democracy in the region.
In recent years we have seen a tendency of States to participate in the discussion on human rights topics through advisory opinions, which is a clear sign of maturity of the inter-American system.
As part of the Court's agenda for this year, always looking to strengthen its jurisdictional work, I have considered that it is an appropriate time to update the Rules of Procedure of the Court, last reformed 15 years ago, on very specific aspects of the internal processing of cases. We have prepared a draft to begin discussions with the Registrar’s Office and the legal area of the Court, who I thank for their collaboration and contributions. Once reviewed by the Court it will be submitted to socialization, and we expect to strengthen this core aspect before the end of the year.
IV. Final thoughts
To conclude, please allow me to share a brief reflection which, although evident, is essential during these times of uncertainty, and that is that democracy and human rights are key pillars in the creation of just, free and equitable societies.
In this context, freedom lies at the core. It is a fundamental value, but also a concept that must be defended, understood and promoted in all of its dimensions.
This is precisely the freedom protected by the American Convention on Human Rights, which establishes in its preamble the need to consolidate in our continent, within the framework of democratic institutions, a system of personal liberty and social justice.
We cannot lose sight of that liberty, core of the international human rights system, which transcends the economic aspect. Although economic freedom is crucial, it is not self-sustaining, and it cannot be the solution to the complex social and structural realities that affect our societies. Freedom depends on a stable environment built on an interrelated network of rights: equality, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, religious freedom, right to dissent, of belonging to a political faction without fear of retaliation, respect of equality, electoral integrity, separation of powers and justice, among other, without which it would lose its true meaning and become an empty notion, incapable of guaranteeing the dignity and well-being of individuals.
Today, the freedom that we yearn for as a region is threatened by populism in its many forms, which often uses the language of democracy and liberty to subvert its principles from within.
Octavio Paz reminds us that “freedom doesn't need wings, what it needs is to take root.” It is not enough to proclaim it; we must guarantee that it takes root in our institutions, our laws, and mainly in the daily lives of people.
In these difficult times for our region and the world, we cannot give up on the fight for human dignity, because doing so would mean renouncing the essence of civilization and democracy. Therefore, resiliency is a moral and legal imperative.
Not giving up is, above all, an ethical and political commitment to the present and the future of humanity. Great challenges lie ahead, but it is precisely through collective resilience that we can overcome them and preserve the universal principles that unite us as a civilization.
Let us not forget that the American Convention and the inter-American system for the protection of human rights were born as an act of resilience against oppression, violence and injustice. Forty-five years later, we firmly continue fulfilling our mandate to defend the American Convention, our wish for democracy and freedom that unites us, and that the region continues to seek.
Thank you.