2
the American
discriminate.
Convention,
as
this
provision
upholds
the
obligation
not
to
4.
In its July 29, 1988 Judgment in the Velásquez Rodríguez case, the Court laid
out a new interpretation of Article 1(1) that would shape the Court’s jurisprudence
thereafter. It is interesting to examine the Court’s reasoning in this judgment.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights had filed an application against
Honduras, for the abduction and disappearance of Angel Manfredo Velásquez
Rodríguez. In the application, Honduras was accused of having violated articles 7
(the right to personal liberty), 5 (the right to humane treatment), and 4 (the right to
life) of the Convention.
After citing the text of Article 1(1) of the Convention, the Court wrote the following:
“This article specifies the obligation assumed by the States Parties in relation to each of
the rights protected. Each claim alleging that one of those rights has been infringed
necessarily implies that Article 1 (1) of the Convention has also been violated.” (2).
The Court pointed out that while the Commission had not accused Honduras of
having violated Article 1(1) of the American Convention, that did not preclude the
Court from applying it by the principle iura novit curia.
Later in the judgment the Court spells out what obligations Article 1(1) of the
American Convention imposes upon a State party, and writes that:
“The first obligation assumed by the States Parties under Article 1 (1) is ‘to respect the
rights and freedoms’ recognized by the Convention ... The second obligation of the
States Parties is to ‘ensure’ the free and full exercise of the rights recognized by the
Convention to every person subject to its jurisdiction. This obligation implies the duty of
States Parties to organize the governmental apparatus and, in general, all the structures
through which public power is exercised, so that they are capable of juridically ensuring
the free and full enjoyment of human rights. As a consequence of this obligation, the
States must prevent, investigate and punish any violation of the rights recognized by
the Convention and, moreover, if possible attempt to restore the right violated and
provide compensation as warranted for damages resulting from the violation.” (3)
Reasoning thus and from the evidence produced, the Court concluded that Honduras
had violated, in the case of Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez, the obligations to
respect and to ensure the rights recognized in Articles 7, 5 and 4 of the American
Convention, “read in conjunction with Article 1 (1) thereof.”(4)
5.
In Chapter II (Articles 3 through 25), the American Convention enumerates
the civil and political rights that States undertake to respect and ensure. Article 2,
for its part, establishes the States parties’ obligation to adopt into their legal systems
such legislative measures as may be necessary to give effect to those rights and
freedoms. Article 1(1) provides that the rights and guarantees recognized in the
Convention shall be respected without any discrimination for reasons of race, color,
sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic
status, birth, or any other social condition.
(2)
IACtHR, Series C, N° 4, pp. 66-67, par. 162.
(3)
IACtHR, Series C, N° 4, pp. 67-69, paragraphs 165 and 166.
(4)
IACtHR, Series C, N° 4, pp. 79 and 80, par. 194.