4. Labor rights have long been present in inter-American jurisprudence. However, it is from 2017 with the case of Lagos del Campo v. Peru 3 that these rights (and their multiple individual and collective facets) were granted autonomy and direct justiciability. 5. In relation to labor rights, the Court’s jurisprudence has focused essentially on the dismissal of trade union members and the execution of union leaders. In the cases of Baena Ricardo v. Panama 4, Huilca Tecse v. Peru, 5 Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru 6, the Court has developed the content of that right, not from the standpoint of Article 8(1)(a) (trade union rights) of the Additional Protocol to the American Convention in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but from the right to association enshrined in Article 16 of the American Convention. 7 6. In the case Baena Ricardo, the Court considered that to determine whether a violation of the right to freedom of association has occurred, this should be analyzed in in relation to trade union freedom. Thus, it stated that, in trade union matters, freedom of association consists basically of the ability to constitute labor union organizations, and to set into motion their internal structure, activities and action program, without any intervention by the public authorities that could limit or impair the exercise of the respective right. On the other hand, under such freedom it is possible to assume that each person may determine, without any pressure, whether or not he or she wishes to form part of an association. This issue, therefore, is about the basic right to constitute a group for the pursuit of a lawful goal, without pressure or interference that may alter or denature its objective. 8 In this regard, the Inter-American Court considered that in trade union matters, freedom of association is of the utmost importance for the defense of workers’ legitimate interests and forms part of the corpus juris on human rights. 9 Freedom of association in labor issues, under the terms of Article 16 of the American Convention, encompasses a right and a freedom, namely: a) the right to form associations without restrictions other than those provided for in subparagraphs 2 and 3 Case of Lagos del Campo v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2017. Series C No. 340. 4 Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 2, 2001. Series C No. 72. 5 121. Case of Huilca Tecse v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 3, 2005. Series C No. 6 Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 202. 7 We should recall that Article 8(1)(a) contemplates one of the two rights referred to in Article 19(6) of the Protocol of San Salvador that “may give rise, through participation of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and, when applicable, of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, to application of the system of individual petitions governed by Article 44 through 51 and 61 through 69 of the American Convention on Human Rights.” 8 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 2, 2001. Series C No. 72, para. 156. 9 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama, supra nota 13, para. 158. 2