The Truth Behind the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Terrorism in Peru: An Analysis of Key Judgments
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The publication is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-4.0 International (CC BY- 4.0) license. The rights to the works published in this journal are the property of the author and are free to distribute and disseminate the same sources as long as you correctly cite the source of publication.
How to Cite
Main Article Content
Abstract
References
Bibliography cited
Alter, K. (2014). The New Frontier of International Law. Princeton University Press.
Bertelsen, S. (2021). A margin for the margin of appreciation: Deference in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 19(3), 887–913. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moab063
Bregaglio, R. (2015). When the Court Turns a Blind Eye: Reparations as a Differentiating Factor in a Post-Conflict Society in the Peruvian Case. Yale Law School / SELA. https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/SELA15_Bregaglio_CV_Sp.pdf
Cervilla, J. (2025). Sovereignty or Setback? The Debate on Peru’s Continued Membership in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Puntoedu. https://puntoedu.pucp.edu.pe/actualidad/sidh-soberania-permanencia-del-peru-en-corte-idh-interamericano-de-derechos-humanos/
Contesse, J. (2016). Challenge and Deference in the Inter-American Human Rights System. Law and Contemporary Problems, 79(2).
Contesse, J. (2019). Resisting the Inter-American Human Rights System. Yale Journal of International Law, 44(2), 179–214.
De la Rosa, P. and Sandoval, V. (2016). Cognitive biases and their influence on judicial decision-making. Contributions of Legal Psychology to adversarial criminal proceedings. Criminal Law and Criminology, 37(102), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.18601/01210483.v37n102.08
Fernández, T., Stockhem, O., Martino, N., & Duarte, T. (2021). Gender biases in the Inter-American Human Rights System? Analysis of the Inter-American Court and Commission’s reports on torture in men’s and women’s prisons. Journal of Empirical Studies in Law, 8. https://doi.org/10.19092/
reed.v8.609
Gross, O., & Ní Aoláin, F. (2006). Law in Times of Crisis: Emergency Powers in Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Guthrie, C., Rachlinski, J., & Wistrich, A. J. (2001). Inside the judicial mind. Cornell Law Review, 86(4), 777–830.
Helfer, L., and Slaughter, A. (1997). Toward a theory of effective supranational adjudication. Yale Law Journal, 107(2), 273–391.
Huneeus, A. (2011). Courts Resisting Courts: Lessons from the Inter-American Court’s Struggle to Enforce Human Rights. Cornell International Law Journal, 44 (3), 493–533.
Legg, A. (2012). The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law: Deference and Proportionality. Oxford University Press.
Malarino, E. (2010). Judicial activism, punitivism, and nationalization: Anti-democratic and anti-liberal tendencies of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. In Latin American Group for Studies on International Criminal Law (ed.), Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights and International Criminal Law (25–61). Konrad Adenauer Foundation. https://archivos.juridicas.unam.mx/www/bjv/libros/8/3515/6.pdf
Muñoz, A. (2011). The influence of cognitive biases on judicial decisions: the human factor. An approach. InDret. Journal for the Analysis of Law, (2), 1–42. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3636909
Posner, E., & De Figueiredo, M. (2005). Is the International Court of Justice Biased? The Journal of Legal Studies, 34(2), 599–630.
Posner, E., and Yoo, J. (2005). Judicial Independence in International Courts. California Law Review, 93(1), 1–74.
Posner, R. (2008). How Judges Think. Harvard University Press.
Rachlinski, J., Johnson, S., Wistrich, A., and Guthrie, C. (2009). Does Unconscious Racial Bias Affect Trial Judges? Notre Dame Law Review, 84(3), 1195–1246.
Sandholtz, W., & Rangel, P. (2020). Law and politics in the inter-American human rights system: amnesty cases. Journal of Law and Courts, 8(2), 287–313.
Sandoval, C. (2017). Reflections on the implementation of reparations in the inter-American system. International Journal of Human Rights, 21(6), 1–15.
Schwöbel-Patel, C. (2018). The ‘ideal’ victim in international criminal law. European Journal of International Law, 29(3), 703–724.
Shelton, D. (2005). Remedies in International Human Rights Law (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Teitel, R. G. (2000). Transitional Justice. Oxford University Press.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission (2003). General Conclusions of the CVR Final Report. Volume I. Institute of Democracy and Human Rights of the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru. https://repositorio.pucp.edu.pe/server/api/core/bitstreams/7a077cd7-43b7-4252-ace0-8659de00d149/content
Voeten, E. (2008). The impartiality of international judges: evidence from the European Court of Human
Rights. American Journal of International Law, 102(4), 417–442.
Zschirnt, S. (2017). Is the Inter-American Human Rights System biased? A quantitative analysis of regional human rights litigation in the Americas. International and Comparative Law Review, 17(1),51–81. https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2018-0002
Cited case law
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (September 17, 1997). Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (September 24, 1999). Ivcher Bronstein v. Peru. Jurisdiction.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (March 3, 2005). Case of Huilca Tecse v. Peru. Merits, reparations, and costs.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (November 26, 2013). Case of Osorio Rivera and Family
Members v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (November 27, 2013). Case of J. v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations, and costs.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. (April 17, 2015). Case of Cruz Sánchez et al. v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs.