The growing number of complaints filed with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights will eventually lead to the necessity of a full-time staff at the organization, Charles Moyer, the former secretary of the court, said at a discussion Wednesday.

The discussion was hosted by the Bernard and Audre Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice at the UT School of Law.

The court, headquartered in San Jose, Costa Rica, was ratified in 1969 and went into effect in 1979 to promote and protect human rights by hearing complaints and making recommendations. It functions as an autonomous judicial body affiliated with the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights.

The commission binds 25 Latin American countries to an agreement intended to respect and ensure human rights.

The court's justices and commissioners - part-time workers, most of whom are retired or hired full-time in other positions - may become full-time positions to keep up with the demand. More than 600 complaints were filed against the top three countries - Peru, Mexico and Argentina - in 2006, according to the commission's Web site.

But the added stress of making the part-time positions full-time could mean a lower quality, Moyer said.

"It might have been instilled by my mentor, but the caliber of person you would get for justice or commissioner will be much less if he or she is full-time," he said.

Moyer outlined three main points that serve both bodies more success than similar projects elsewhere in the world.

"What makes the commission and the court work better than its counterparts is first, its highly publicized on-site visits that not only analyze the situation first-hand, but also reminds the people of the country about the bodies' existence," Moyer said. "Secondly, is obviously the general cases that the court hears and rules on."

Moyer said his third point was a rule the commission created that was soon adopted by the United Nations.

"We had problems with countries simply ignoring the complaints that were filed with the commission and the recommendations we made. But when the rule was passed, it gave these countries 90 days to answer the complaint filed against them before it was assumed to be true," he said.

Helena Coronado, a legal intern at the Rapoport Center and alumna of the School of Law, sat in the audience, but struggled with how the forces of sovereignty and globalization push and pull the powers of the Court and the Commission.

"This project does have great potential simply because it hasn't lost its enthusiasm in pursuing its goals. But when one considers the tumultuous politics south of the Rio Grande and the identities these nations hold dear, it must be difficult to withstand the resistance," she said.

Coronado said she hoped the commission and the court would consider recruiting employees who become recognized early in the legal field.

"By recruiting young talent and making it a full-time job, I think the court and the commission will give itself teeth and become more convincing when handling human rights abusers," she said.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools