History and Action: the Inter-American Human Rights System and the Role of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

This article examines the historical origins of the Inter-American human rights system and key achievements of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights over the past fifty years. The article also focuses on various notable activities and achievements of the Commission during three discreet periods between 1960 and 2004. It explores the Commission’s use of on-site visits and country reports to expose human rights violations of military governments during the 1970s and its increased use of the case system since the restoration of democratic rule in the 1990s. The article notes how key themes and shifts in US foreign policy, from FDR’s Good Neighbor Policy to Cold War efforts to contain Communism, impacted the Commission’s work. The Commission has in recent years faced challenges in providing guidance to OAS member states on crafting anti-terrorism measures that do not run afoul of their international human rights obligations. The article concludes by noting other obstacles currently faced by the Commission, most notably the fact that both the US and Canada have refused to ratify the American Convention on Human Rights

Extraterritorial Application of the Human Rights to Life and Personal Liberty, Including Habeas Corpus, During Situations of Armed Conflict

Chapter 6 of Research Handbook on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law In the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, the US, with the assistance of its coalition partners – all parties to various human rights instruments – initiated the so-called ‘war on terror’ by invading Afghanistan, where their armed forces killed or captured hundreds of ‘terrorist suspects’. Some of those detained were taken to the US military facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, while others have languished in US custody in Afghanistan. These actions raise the question whether a State is bound by its human rights obligations when its agents operate outside of national territory. And, if so, how do those obligations interrelate with the State’s other obligations under international humanitarian law when its counter-terrorism operations coincide with situations of armed conflict. This chapter addresses these questions. In particular, it examines the extraterritorial reach of two fundamental human rights during two situations recognized in international law. These rights are the right to life and the right to liberty and the related procedural safeguard of habeas corpus. The two situations examined are: (1) international armed conflicts, including occupation; and (2) non-international armed conflicts. The paper surveys the jurisprudence on the extraterritorial application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the American Convention on Human Rights (American Convention) and American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (American Declaration), and the European Convention on Human Rights (European Convention), and the extent to which rights in these instruments can be derogated from. It also examines how the treaty bodies supervising these instruments view the relationship between international human rights law (HRL) and international humanitarian law (IHL) in situations of armed conflict. Relevant decisions of the International Court of Justice are also referenced in this connection. The chapter also identifies certain gaps in legal protection.https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/facsch_bk_contributions/1149/thumbnail.jp

Report of the Independent Expert on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorism

The Commission on Human Rights, in resolution 2004/87, decided to designate, from within existing resources, for a period of one year, an independent expert to assist the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the fulfillment of the mandate described in the resolution and, “taking fully into account the study requested in General Assembly resolution 58/187, as well as the discussions in the Assembly and the views of States thereon, to submit a report, through the High Commissioner, to the Commission at its sixty-first session on ways and means of strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”. This report is submitted in accordance with resolution 2004/87. It builds and elaborates on the study of the High Commissioner (A/59/428) submitted to the fifty-ninth session of the General Assembly pursuant to Assembly resolution 58/187. The report identifies some key issues affecting the enjoyment of human rights in the struggle against terrorism that either have not been addressed or extensively developed by other mandate holders. The report then goes on to address how to strengthen the United Nations human rights mechanisms in protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. It acknowledges that significant steps have already been taken by the United Nations human rights system to address the protection and promotion of human rights in the struggle against terrorism. Nevertheless, the independent expert concludes that, given the gaps in coverage of the monitoring systems of the special procedures and treaty bodies and the pressing need to strengthen human rights protections while countering terrorism, the Commission should consider the creation of a special procedure with a multidimensional mandate to monitor States’ counter-terrorism measures and their compatibility with international human rights law