Inter-American Human Rights Court
| Inter-American Court of Human Rights | |
|---|---|
| Established | 22 May 1979 |
| Country | The Americas |
| Location |
 San José, Costa Rica
|
| Authorized by |
American Convention on Human Rights Statute of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights |
| Judge term length | Six years |
| No. of positions | Seven |
| Website | Official Website |
| President | |
| Currently | Judge Roberto de Figueiredo Caldas |
| Since | 2016 |
| Lead position ends | 2018 |
| Vice-President | |
| Currently | Judge Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor Poisot |
| Since | 2016 |
| Lead position ends | 2018 |
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is an autonomous judicial institution based in the city of San José, Costa Rica. Together with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, it makes up the human rights protection system of the Organization of American States (OAS), which serves to uphold and promote basic rights and freedoms in the Americas.
The Organization of American States established the Court in 1979 to enforce and interpret the provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights. Its two main functions are thus adjudicatory and advisory. Under the former, it hears and rules on the specific cases of human rights violations referred to it. Under the latter, it issues opinions on matters of legal interpretation brought to its attention by other OAS bodies or member states.
The adjudicatory function requires the Court to rule on cases brought before it in which a state party to the Convention, and thus has accepted its jurisdiction, is accused of a human rights violation.
In addition to ratifying the Convention, a state party must voluntarily submit to the Court's jurisdiction for it to be competent to hear a case involving that state. Acceptance of contentious jurisdiction can be given on a blanket basis – to date, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, and Venezuela have done so – or, alternatively, a state can agree to abide by the Court's jurisdiction in a specific, individual case.
...
Wikipedia