The Inter American Court of Human Rights The Legitimacy of International Courts and Tribunals

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1: A GENERAL FRAMEWORK ON THE DISCOURSE ON THE LEGITIMACY OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS BODIES

Introduction

1. On the context and progress of the international law discipline

1.1. A flourishing of international legal institutions and liberal values: after darkness, war and politics

1.2. The rise of discourses on the legitimacy of international human rights judicial bodies

2. Attempts to theorise the legitimacy of international judicial bodies

2.1. Normative legitimacy

3. Two normative approaches to IHRB legitimacy

3.1. The state-centric model of legitimacy

3.2. The constitutional approach to the legitimacy of international tribunals

4. Conclusion

CHAPTER 2: IDEOLOGY AND SELF-VALIDATION: CRITICAL LEGAL THEORY

Introduction

1. Critical legal studies

2. Legal Marxism

2.1. A toolkit of Marxist concepts

3. Self-validation and ideology as theoretical lenses: problematising legitimacy of the IACtHR

CHAPTER 3: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND ITS PRACTICE AS A SUPRACONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL

Introduction

1. The Inter-American System of Human Rights and the IACtHR

2. Performance and practices of the IACtHR

2.1. Creation of uniform standards of human rights contents

2.2. Social rights protection

2.3. Holistic reparations

2.4. Supervision of compliance

3. Control of conventionality, general effects and Inter-American Corpus Juris

CHAPTER 4: TWO COMPETING LEGAL STREAMS ON THE LEGITIMACY OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Introduction

1. On the discourses on the legitimacy of the Court and the actors who drive them

2. The constitutional perspective

2.1. Who drives the constitutional perspective?

2.2. The constitutionalisation of international law

2.3. Supranationalisation I: the existence of a common Corpus Juris and bloc of conventionality

2.4. Dialogue and subsidiarity

2.5. Supranationalisation II: control of conventionality

2.6. Supranationalisation III: the Court’s public authority and transnational democratic grounds

2.7. Margin of appreciation: between reluctance and acceptance

2.8. Democratic transformation

3. The state-centric local democratic approach

3.1. Who drives the state-centric approach?

3.2. Approach to the existence of a ius constitutionale commune

3.3. Principle of subsidiarity against supranationalisation

3.4. Arguments against the Court as ultimate interpreter (Supranationalisation II)

3.5. Defence of local democracies and sovereignty (Supranationalisation III)

3.6. Court and its democratic legitimacy

3.7. Margin of appreciation as an alternative solution to supranationalisation

3.8. Democratic transformation at the local level

Conclusion

CHAPTER 5: STATE-CENTRIC VS. CONSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSES?: CONFLUENCE RATHER THAN OPPOSITION

Introduction

1. The criteria grounding the discourses on the legitimacy of the Court

2. On the analysis of the actors and their discourses

3. Similarities masked as disagreements in the two discourses on the legitimacy of the Court

3.1. The constitutional analogy

3.2. Subsidiarity and margin of appreciation

3.3. Democratic transformation

4. Ideology and false contingency as flaws in the use of the constitutional analogy

4.1. The use of the constitutional analogy in international law

4.2. Constitutional analogies and the legitimacy of the Court

5. Conclusions

CHAPTER 6: IDEOLOGY AND THE IMAGE OF THE IACTHR AS DEMOCRACY-BUILDER

Introduction

1. Democracy and the IACtHR as a democracy-builder

2. Ideology critique of the two legal discourses on the legitimacy of the IACtHR as a democracy-builder

2.1. Naturalisation and false contingency of the concept of procedural democracy

2.2. Procedural democracy: expert’s unfinished journey

2.3. Ideology and distrust over majorities

2.4. Democratic proceedings and substantive equality

Conclusion

CONCLUSION

1. The actors involved in the deployment of the two legal perspectives

2. Ideology as a method of critique

3. Constitutional analogy: On the existence of a ius constitutionale commune

3.1. Ius constitutionale commune created by judges

3.2. Liberal constitutionalism: human rights and democracy as part of the ius constitutionale commune

4. Dialogue, margin of appreciation and subsidiarity

5. On the role of the Court as an agent of democratisation

6. On the legitimacy of the Court

Biography

Natalia Torres Zúñiga is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, University of Oslo. She writes in the areas of international human rights law, constitutional law, law and political economy.