Publication: Deliberación, deferencia y Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. El caso Gelman vs Uruguay
Loading...
Identifiers
Publication date
2021-03-10
Defense date
Authors
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Impact
Export
Abstract
El caso Gelman supuso la condena de Uruguay por violación de los derechos al reconocimiento de la personalidad jurídica, a la vida, a la integridad personal y a la libertad personal; a la familia, al nombre, a los derechos de los niños y niñas y a la nacionalidad, a la protección de la familia; a las garantías judiciales y a la protección judicial y por haber incumplido la obligación de adecuar su derecho interno a la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos. Amparado en la legitimidad democrática de los referéndums que convalidaban la Ley de Caducidad, Uruguay ha prorrogado la impunidad de los crímenes de la dictadura no ejecutando la sentencia. El autor critica la validez de estos argumentos exculpatorios de este incumplimiento sobre la base de diversas razones.
The Gelman case entails the conviction of Uruguay for violation of the rights to recognition of legal personality, to life, to personal integrity and to personal liberty; to the family, to the name, to the rights of children and to nationality, to the protection of the family, to judicial guarantees and judicial protection and because has failed to comply with the obligation to adapt its domestic law to the American Convention on Human Rights. Protected by the democratic legitimacy of the referendums that validated the Expiry Law, Uruguay has extended impunity for the crimes of the dictatorship by not executing the sentence. The author criticizes the validity of these exculpatory arguments of this unfulfilment based on various reasons.
The Gelman case entails the conviction of Uruguay for violation of the rights to recognition of legal personality, to life, to personal integrity and to personal liberty; to the family, to the name, to the rights of children and to nationality, to the protection of the family, to judicial guarantees and judicial protection and because has failed to comply with the obligation to adapt its domestic law to the American Convention on Human Rights. Protected by the democratic legitimacy of the referendums that validated the Expiry Law, Uruguay has extended impunity for the crimes of the dictatorship by not executing the sentence. The author criticizes the validity of these exculpatory arguments of this unfulfilment based on various reasons.
Description
Keywords
Justicia transicional, Memoria histórica, Democracia y tribunales internacionales, Marcos deliberativos, Transitional justice, Historical memory, Democracy and international courts, Deliberative frameworks
Bibliographic citation
Sauca Cano, J. M. (2021). Deliberación, deferencia y Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. El caso Gelman vs Uruguay. Araucaria, 23(46).