Triunfo de la cruz
Download 0.76 Mb.
|
Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraphs 164 and 165.
337 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraph 179. 338 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraph 167 and paragraph 180-182. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraph 133. 339 I/A Court H.R, Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraphs 27, 131, 133, 154. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraphs 201-202. 340 IACHR, Report No. 40/04, Case 12.053, Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District (Belize), October 12, 2004, paragraph 142. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraph 133. IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.96, Doc. 10 rev.1, April 24, 1997. IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.96, Doc. 10 rev.1, April 24, 1997. IACHR, Access to Justice and Social Inclusion: The Road Towards Strengthening Democracy In Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, June 28, 2007, paragraph 248. 341 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraph 133. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraphs 185-187. 342 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraph 186. 343 IACHR, Democracy and Human Rights in Venezuela, 2009. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 54, December 30, 2009, paragraph 1137, Recommendations 5 and 6; IACHR, Access to Justice and Social Inclusion: The Road Towards Strengthening Democracy In Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, June 28, 2007, paragraphs 248 and 297, Recommendations 5 and 6. 344 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraphs 138-139. Según advierte la Corte en dicha sentencia, en este mismo sentido se han pronunciado distintos órganos internacionales de derechos humanos. See inter alia United Nations, Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Observations of the Reports submitted by States parties under article 9 of the Convention. Concluding Observations on Ecuador, paragraph 16. United Nations, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human Rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, submitted in accordance with Commission resolution 2001/65 (Fifty-ninth session), United Nations Doc. E/CN.4/2003/90, January 21, 2003, paragraph 66. 345 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraph 129. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraph 205. 346 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Interpretation of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008 Series C No. 185, paragraph 40. IACHR, Access to Justice and Social Inclusion: The Road Towards Strengthening Democracy In Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, June 28, 2007, paragraph 254. 347 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2007. Series C No. 172, paragraph 154. 348 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Interpretation of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008 Series C No. 185, paragraph 41. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245. paragraph 205-206. 349 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Interpretation of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008 Series C No. 185, paragraph 133; I/A Court H.R, Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Interpretation of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008 Series C No. 185, paragraph 16. 350 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Interpretation of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008 Series C No. 185, paragraph 41. 351 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, paragraph 63. I/A Court H.R, Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, paragraphs 82, 83. 352 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2001. Series C No. 79, paragraph 138. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, paragraph 143. IACHR, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ Rights Over Their Ancestral Lands and Natural Resources. Norms and Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Human Rights System. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.Doc.56/09, December 30, 2009, paragraph 335. 353 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, paragraph 62. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, paragraphs 82, 83. 354 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, paragraphs 81, 82. 355 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, paragraph 62. I/A Court H.R. Case of Baena Ricardo et al v. Panama. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of February 2nd, 2001. Series C No. 72, paragraph 127. I/A Court H.R. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, paragraphs 82, 83. The effective remedies that the State must provide under Article 25 of the American Convention “must be implemented in accordance with the rules of due legal process (Article 8 of the Convention)” [I/A Court H.R. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, paragraph 62]. The Inter-American Court has indicated that the domestic administrative procedures that must comply with the guarantees of due legal process include, for instance, the procedures for recognizing indigenous leaders, procedures for recognizing legal status, and the procedures for restitution of land [I/A Court H.R. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, paragraphs 81, 82]. 356 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2001. Series C No. 79, paragraph 115. 357 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2001. Series C No. 79, paragraphs 122, 123. 358 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Xákmok Kásek Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 24, 2010 Series C No. 214, paragraph 140. 359 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, paragraph 104. Likewise, see Case of the Xákmok Kásek Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 24, 2010 Series C No. 214, paragraph 146. 360 I/A Court H.R., Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Judgment of March 14, 2001. Series C No. 75, paragraph 48. 361 I/A Court H.R., Case of Loayza Tamayo. Reparations. Judgment of November 27, 1998. Series C No. 42, paragraph 169; I/A Court H.R. Velásquez Rodríguez Case. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of June 26, 1987. Series C No. 1. paragraph 91; I/A Court H.R., Case of Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of June 26, 1987. Series C No. 2, paragraph 90. 362 I/A Court H.R., Tibi v. Ecuador Case. Judgment of September 7, 2004. Series C No. 114. paragraph 130; “Five Pensioners” Case. Judgment of February 28, 2003. Series C No. 98, paragraph 126. 363 I/A Court H.R., Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Judgment of March 14, 2001. Series C No. 75, paragraph 43. 364 I/A Court H.R., Case of Kawas Fernández v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of April 3rd, 2009. Series C No. 196, paragraph 101. 365 I/A Court H.R., Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, paragraph 177; I/A Court H.R., Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, paragraph 131; and I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, paragraph 120. 366 I/A Court H.R. Case of García Prieto et al v. El Salvador. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C No. 168, paragraph 101; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers v. Peru. Judgment of July 8, 2004. Series C No. 110, paragraph 146; I/A Court H.R., Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, paragraph 130. 367 I/A Court H.R. Case of Bulacio v. Argentina. Judgment of September 18, 2003. Series C No. 100, paragraph 114; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Rochela Massacre v. Colombia. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C. No. 163. Paragraph 146; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, paragraph 382. 368 I/A Court H.R. Case of Baldeón García v. Peru. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C No. 147, paragraph 142. 369 I/A Court H.R. Case of Myrna Mack Chang v. Guatemala. Judgment of November 25, 2003. Series C No. 101, paragraph 210. I/A Court H.R., Case of Bulacio v. Argentina. Judgment of September 18, 2003. Series C No. 100, paragraph 115. 370 IACHR, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ Rights Over Their Ancestral Lands and Natural Resources. Norms and Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Human Rights System. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.Doc.56/09, December 30, 2009, paragraph 113. IACHR, Democracy and Human Rights in Venezuela, 2009. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 54, December 30, 2009, paragraphs 1062-1066; 1071; 1137 – Recommendations 1 to 4. IACHR, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Colombia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.102, Doc. 9 rev. 1, February 26, 1999, paragraphs 21-27 and Recommendation 3. 371 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124. Doc. 5 rev.1, March 7, 2006. Likewise, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has indicated that the lack of investigation and punishment of those responsible for violations against human rights defenders “constitutes the factor that places the defenders at greatest risk, since it leaves them defenseless and unprotected.” OHCHR. Defending Human Rights: Caught Between Commitment and Risk. Executive Summary, paragraph 7. http://www.hchr.org.mx/documentos/libros/informepdf.pdf. 372 I/A Court H.R. Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas v. Colombia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of May 26, 2010. paragraph 153. Directory: iachr -> decisions -> court decisions -> Admissibility court -> Report on the merits iachr -> Original: Spanish inter-american commission on human rights iachr -> Chapter IV. A the use of force introduction iachr -> Inter-american commission on human rights Download 0.76 Mb. Share with your friends:
|