Abstract
How have Inter-American human rights bodies dealt with terrorism and how has it shaped their case law? The Inter-American system of Human Rights has been a pioneer in this field, paving the way toward assessing and establishing the limits of States’ behavior in the fight against terrorism. The American continent is not foreign to the terrorism, even before the attacks on the twin towers and the 11 September events gave it global resonance. This chapter will assess the approach adopted by the Inter-American bodies and the complexities in developing such a response. The reactions of both the Inter-American Commission and the Court to counterterrorist measures and human rights abuses have generated a rich and well-developed body of case law. As with many other topics, the Inter-American Court has played a leading role and, over time, has transformed the American Convention through interpretation, making it a well-adapted mechanism in the fight against human rights abuses. States are confronted with a complex dilemma, as they have to decide whether to declare a state of emergency and exception or deal with terrorism in the context of the normal working of the institutions of the democratic State. In the first case, if the State recognizes a threat that may endanger the life of the nation, the state of emergency allows it to adopt measures restricting human rights in the fight against terrorism under international supervision. In the second case, the State does not specify that there is an extraordinarily grave danger, and counterterrorist measures will therefore have to satisfy the tests of proportionality and necessity when limiting individual human rights. Dealing with “gray areas,” with situations in between exception and normality, and which call for adopting restrictive measures which affect everyday life, has triggered a wide range of case law. Most cases happen in a context in which there is not an open conflict but, rather, concern a situation of internal strife. Instances of State terrorism are also at the basis of some of the most powerful rulings issues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Inter-American Court Judgments and Advisory Opinions
IACHR, January 30, 1987, Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations (Arts. 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) American Convention on Human Rights), Series A No. 8
IACHR, October 6, 1987, Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (Arts. 27(2), 25 and 8 American Convention on Human Rights), Series A No. 9, para. 20
IACHR, January 39, 1995, Merits, Neira Alegría et al. v Peru, Series C No. 20
IACHR, September 17, 1997, Merits, Loayza Tamayo v Peru, Series C No. 33
IACHR, September 4, 1998, Preliminary objections, Castillo Petruzzi et al. v Peru, Series C No. 41
IACHR, May 30, 1999, Merits, reparations and costs, Castillo Petruzzi et al. v Peru, Series C No. 52
IACHR, August 16, 2000, Merits, Durand and Ugarte v Peru, Series C No. 68
IACHR, August 18, 2000, Cantoral Benavides v Peru, Series C No. 69
IACHR, February 2, 2001, Baena Ricardo and others v. Panama, Series C, No. 72
IACHR, March 14, 2001, Merits, Barrios Altos (Chumbipuma Aguirre) v Peru, Series C No. 75
IACHR, November 18, 2004, Merits, reparations and costs, De la Cruz Flores v Peru, Series C No. 115
IACHR, November 25, 2004, Merits, reparations and costs, Lori Berenson Mejía v. Peru, Series C No. 119
IACHR, November 25, 2005, Merits, García Asto and Rodríguez Rojas v Peru, Series C No. 137
IACHR, November 25, 2006, Merits, reparations and costs, Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, Series C No. 160
IACHR, November 29, 2006, Merits, reparations and costs, La Cantuta v Peru, Series C No. 162
IACHR, May 29, 2014, Merits, reparations and costs, Norín Catriman et al v Chile, Series C No. 279
IACHR, November 20, 2014, Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, Espinoza Gonzales v Peru, Series C No. 289
IACHR, April 17, 2015, Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, Cruz Sanchez et al v Peru, Series C No. 292
IACHR, October 21, 2016, Merits, reparations and costs, William Pollo Rivera v Peru, Series C No. 319
IACHR, May 30, 2018, Order, Monitoring complance with judgments Barrios Altos and La Cantuta v Peru
Inter-American Commission Reports
Inter-American Commission, Annual report, Argentina, 1980
Inter-American Commission, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights, 2002
European Court of Human Rights Judgments
A v. UK, [2002] ECHR
Other References
Abad Yupanqui S (2005) Retos jurídicos del informe de la CVR: la necesaria garantía del derecho a la verdad. Rev Fac Derecho, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú 57:41–58
Bianchi A (ed) (2004) Enforcing international law norms against terrorism. Hart, Oxford/Portland
Burgorgue-Larsen L, Ubeda de Torres A (2011) The inter-American court. Case-law and commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Cassel D (1996) Lessons from the Americas: guidelines for international response to amnesties for atrocities. Law Contemp Probl 59:197–230
Cassel D (2001) La lucha contra la impunidad ante el sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos. In: Verdad y Justicia, Homenaje a Emilio F. Mignone. IIHR, San José, pp 357–410
Hafner-Burton E (2012) International human rights regimes. Annu Rev Polit Sci 15:265–286
Martin C (2007) Catching up with the past: recent decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights addressing gross human rights violations perpetrated during the 1970–1980s. Hum Rights Law Rev 7:774–792
Mendez JE (2004) Derecho a la verdad frente a las graves violaciones a los derechos humanos. In: Abregú M, Courtis C (eds) La aplicación de los tratados sobre derechos humanos por los tribunales locales, 2nd edn. Ediciones del Puerto, Buenos Aires, pp 517–540
Ubeda de Torres A (2007) Democracia y derechos humanos. Estudio comparado de los sistemas europeo e interamericano de protección de los derechos humanos. Reus, Madrid
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Ubeda de Torres, A. (2019). The Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Face of Terrorism. In: Shor, E., Hoadley, S. (eds) International Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism. International Human Rights. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3894-5_26-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3894-5_26-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3894-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3894-5
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences