SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
 número126CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES IN 1971 IN FRANCE AND IN 1991 IN COLOMBIA. AN ANALYSIS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE THEORY OF JURIDICAL REVOLUTIONARBITRATION AND LEGAL SYSTEMS IN LATIN AMERICA: A STUDY ON FORMALISATION AND JUDICIALISATION índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Em processo de indexaçãoCitado por Google
  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO
  • Em processo de indexaçãoSimilares em Google

Compartilhar


Vniversitas

versão impressa ISSN 0041-9060

Resumo

PRIETO SANJUAN, Rafael A. "YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOUR PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE MISLED THE FBI...?" WHEN INTERNATIONAL LITIGATION AND CRIMINAL DEFENSE ARE CONFUSED: COMMENTS ON THE CASE OF MASSACRE OF SANTO DOMINGO V. COLOMBIA. Vniversitas [online]. 2013, n.126, pp.165-197. ISSN 0041-9060.

The Inter-American Human Rights system continues to be one full of surprises. On the one hand, there are State official agencies that see no distinction between the system itself and any defense in a typical criminal case, and on the other hand, there is an Inter-American Court that only exceptionally rescues the judicial internal system of the States. That was exactly what occurred in the Massacre of Santo Domingo v. Colombia case involving a tragic event where 17 civilians were killed and 27 were injured while a violent fight took place between the Colombian military and the FARC. The first part of this manuscript will feature the inconsistencies of the State -the only entity with standing before the Court- which resorted to a defense that assailed its own Judicial Branch by both denouncing an alleged fraud on the part of the Prosecutor's Office and by dismissing the decisions made by the criminal and administrative judicial instances. Ironically enough, this strategy could well be the total opposite of what an appropriate defense of the troops involved in this tragic event should look like. The second part of this manuscript will feature the form in which the Inter-American Court ended up saving the judicial branch when it labeled the grounds of the State agent (as to the defense presented before the IAHR Commission) as estoppel and when it described such behavior, without hesitation, as contrary to the principles of good faith, equity and legal stability.

Palavras-chave : International Litigation; Human Rights; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; Colombia; Estoppel; Due Process; Judicial Protection; Redress; Due process of Law; reparation (Criminal justice); Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

        · resumo em Espanhol     · texto em Espanhol     · Espanhol ( pdf )