The active development of Inter-American Court of Human Hights

• Autor(a) principal: Gontijo, André Pires
• Data de Publicação: 2015
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas (Online)
• Texto Completo: https://www.publicacoesacademicas.uniceub.br/RBPP/article/view/3063
• topic: Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos.; Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos; Jurisdição Facultativa e Obrigatória; Jus Cogens.

The objective of this paper is to analyze the active development of Inter- -American Court of Human Rights, as well as examining its institutional mission to contribute to the harmonization of human rights within the Inter-American System. First, we discuss the role of optional jurisdiction under the American Convention on Human Rights to then analyze the transition to compulsory jurisdiction. Finally, we observe the consequences of development as compulsory jurisdiction, as the law density of its rulings and implement the idea of jus cogens. As a methodological approach, the research used the case analysis of the Court, in addition to references in the dogmatic-planning research. In conclusion, this study revealed the importance of the active behavior of the Court for its qualification as compulsory jurisdiction. The theoretical and practical limitations of the research reach the space soon to view the receptivity of the amendment of the compulsory jurisdiction of states profile. The implications for future research shows that the transition to the profile of compulsory jurisdiction is presented as a true evolutionary leap and reveals the importance of the Court as an actor responsible for the realization of human rights in the context of Latin America. The value and originality of the research are to study the developing jurisprudence of the Court as to extend the quality of jus cogens to Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention, the Court allowed his compulsory jurisdiction enter therein the scope of protection of the constitutional process of the States for by the provisions of Article 1, item 1 and 2, the conventional text, putting into practice the constitutional compensation of jus cogens, because of the protection of human rights deficit, using the evolutionary interpretation given to own Article 25 of the Convention.