The Reception of Human Rights Treaties by Domestic Courts: Paradigmatic Judicial Decisions from Colombia, Argentina and Brazil

Abstract

The effective implementation of international human rights treaties depends on factors that are not limited to its incorporation into domestic law. In order to have a complete reception of the treaty, courts must be provided with independency (exercise of its functions of government monitoring), treaties must have direct effect (anyone can use them in court, regardless of subsequent legislative action) and courts must perform a consistent interpretation of its provisions (internal standards in accordance with international ones, to ensure compliance with international obligations). By the comparative method used in this article, we can conclude that Argentina and Colombia show a greater reception of the Amer-ican Convention on Human Rights, not only because they elevated it to the rank of constitutional law, but mainly because they give it direct effect and apply consistent interpretation. Although giving direct effect to the American Convention, the Brazilian Supreme Court has not yet developed a jurisprudence on consistent interpretation, creating obstacles to the reception and effective treaty implementation.