Inter American Convention On Human Rights

The American Convention on Human Rights was adopted in 1969 and is based on the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It covers civil and political rights, such as the right to life and a fair trial, as well as economic and social rights. It also emphasizes the importance of protecting families and children. The Convention establishes a framework for the protection and enforcement of these rights, including the establishment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The Convention echoes similar charters, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the African Charter on Human Rights. Welcome to yet another episode of the Diary of a Lawyer, and today we are going to be talking about the American Convention on Human Rights. The American Convention on Human Rights was adopted at the Inter-American Specialist Conference on Human Rights in San Jose, Costa Rica on the 22nd of November 1969. I'll just quickly go through a preamble where the signatories to the convention reaffirmed. The reaffirmed, I'm just paraphrasing, the reaffirmed intention to consolidate in that specific hemisphere the framework of domestic institutions, personal liberty, social justice, and based on respect for the essential rights of man. They recognized that the rights are not derived from one's being a national of a certain state, but are based on the attributes of a human personality and therefore justify international protection in the form of convention rights and duties of a man and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Again, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights seems to be a recurring theme or a foundation of the other conventions that we've looked at, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the African Charter on Human Rights. And they went into rhetoric that in accordance with the UDHR, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that the ideal of free men enjoy freedom from here and want and can only be achieved only if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy and participate in his economic, social, and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights. And considered that the Third Special Inter-American Conference in Buenos Aires 1967 approved the incorporation of the Charter and resolved that an Inter-American Convention on Human Rights should determine the structure, competence, and procedure of the elements responsible for these human rights. So that's basically a bit of a background, but it seems to echo other charters. And now the rights alone, but we'll just quickly go through them and we're not going to go into the intrinsic case law, but just to go through them so that we have a general understanding of what it involves. It starts with the civil and political rights and mentions that Article 3, everyone has a right to judicial, sorry, juridical personality. And they go on to Article 4, where they mention the right to life, which is self-evident. Article 5, the right to human treatment. Article 6, freedom from slavery. Article 7, the right to personal liberty. Article 8, the right to a fair trial in any proceedings. Article 9, freedom from post-facto laws. Now this is important because it's made explicitly clear in this charter. And it simply says that no one shall be convicted of any act or commission or omission that did not constitute a criminal offence under the applicable law at the time it was committed. In other words, you can't go back and create offences that were not offences at the time an event did or did not happen. And it goes on to say that a heavier penalty shall not be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed. And concludes that if subsequently commissioned for defence, the law provides for the imposition of the life sentence, the person should be considered in that regard. I mean there's a slight interrelation with the American Constitution in relation to similar, not the same, double jeopardy. But it makes reference to effective punishment that is fair, that people should not be punished twice, and that excessive punishment is inherently unconstitutional in the case of the American Constitution. But also here, it's under Article 9, it makes reference to, but not exactly similar, which states that freedom from ex-post-facto laws. Article 10 is the right to compensation in accordance with the law in the event that the person has been sentenced by a final judgment for a miscarriage of justice. Article 11, the right to privacy, someone to have his own or respected and his dignity recognised. Article 12, freedom of conscience and religion, self-evident. Article 13, freedom of thought and expression, again, self-evident. There's another one, which is slightly more explicit than perhaps in other conventions, which is the right of reply, where it's gotten to say that anyone injured by inaccurate offensive statements or ideas disseminated to the public in general by a legally regulated medium of communication has a right to reply or to make a correction using the same communications alphabet under such conditions as the law may establish. We often see this in the case of media correction. But also, if you go into civil law, that may go into various other areas which we shall not go into here. The right of assembly, which is reference to peaceful assembly, without arms is recognised and no restriction may be placed on such exercise other than those imposing conformity with the law unnecessary in democratic society. Article 16, the freedom of association, self-evident. Rights of families, Article 17, and again, there seems to be a recurrent theme here. I think it's a product of the time, which is the family as a national and fundamental unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state. There's another right, which is, I think, again, not very explicit in others, which is the right to a name. They mention rights of a child, as a minor, in terms of protection and conditions on the part of his family and his side of the state. The right to nationality, and no one shall be a betrayer of the right to nationality or the right to change it. The right to property, which is on Article 21. And, you know, you cannot be deprived of it by just compensation. Article 22, which is freedom of movement and residence, again, self-evident. Article 23, right to participate in government. Article 22, right to equal protection of the laws. Article 25, right to judicial protection. And the next chapter, I think, Chapter 3, covers economic and social rights of individuals. And there are various details that go into those. But I think the headline here is that the parties undertake to make sure, both internally and through their cooperation, either through technical or economic nature, that these legislation or other means, appropriate means, where there is a full realization of the rights implicit in the economic, social, educational, scientific and cultural standards set forth in the Charter. Those are sort of the general rights that we can go in the time we have. But that, essentially, the Commission recognizes that there are rights that need to be protected, and it sets out in the Charter. And the other details go down to set out how exactly, in terms of the constitution of the bodies and technical nature, and how they are going to be applied, the process, and the various organs that will be responsible for executing those rights. But the concluding article deals with the Secretary General, where, in writing, shall request each party to present, within 90 days, its candidates for membership on the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and prepare a list of alphabetical, in alphabetical order, the candidates presented, and send it to the state parties at least, you know, 30 days prior to the next session of the General Assembly. There, again, a procedure issue. And finally, Article 22, which deals with judges, and determines how judges, or list of candidates, can be nominated, appointed, etc., etc. And so, that is it, in a nutshell, on the Inter-American Charter of Human Rights. But the common theme seems to be, it seems to echo that founding document. I would characterize the founding document, which is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And they sort of, then they put it into a local nature, depending on the local circumstances, whether that's the European Convention of Human Rights, or the African Charter of Human Rights, or indeed, as we see, the South American, the Inter-American Charter of Human Rights. But they all seem to base that on the founding principle, which is the African, sorry, on the founding document, which is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. So, there we shall leave it, on this edition of the Diary of a Lawyer, and today we've covered the Inter-American Charter of Human Rights. And I'll speak to you soon, thank you, and goodbye. Thank you.