“Cross-fertilization” as a neocolonial tool? Impressions deriving from the Artavia Murilo vs. Costa Rica case before the Interamerican Court of Human Rights

• Autor(a) principal: A. F. R. Cardoso Squeff, Tatiana
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Revista da Faculdade de Direito do Sul de Minas (Online)
• Texto Completo: https://revista.fdsm.edu.br/index.php/revistafdsm/article/view/33
• topic: Cross-fertilization; Jurisprudence; Coloniality; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; Altavia Murilo et al. v. Costa Rica

Considering the increase in international courts in recent years, it is natural that the numbers of international precedents enlarge as well. Given this fact, and in the light of art. 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which establishes jurisprudence as a source of international law, there is nothing to prevent the various international courts from using precedents from their peers to support a decision adjudicated before them. Thus, an interesting question is precisely whether this communicative tool could not carry with it colonial standards, maintaining an excluding structure in international (human rights) law. Therefore, this text seeks to debate this issue by taking as an example the discussions in the Artavia Murilo et al. v. Costa Rica case judged by the Inter-American Court, concluding that it is necessary to use jurisprudence with parsimony, due to regional particularities and the need to promote ratios decidendi duly located. To do so, a research of an applied nature is carried out, based on the deductive method, addressing the questions raised in a descriptive and exploratory manner, based on sources collected qualitatively, primarily, using bibliographical and documentary techniques.