Canada and the Inter-American Human Rights System

Abstract

INTRODUCTIONWhen Canada became a Member of the Organization of American States (OAS) in 1990, most of Latin America was at a crossroad in a post-cold war transition from authoritarian regimes to democracies. The Canadian government played a fundamental role in the creation and development of the organization's unit for the promotion of democracy, as well as of other similar initiatives, in this period. This mark of leadership would have an important impact on the organization later on, including regarding the adoption of the 2001 Inter- American Democratic Charter, which attests to the importance of human rights for democracy and vice-versa. In fact, the promotion of democratic processes and the consolidation of democratic institutions, as well as the promotion and protection of human rights, are certainly among the OAS's most significant successes in the institution's recent history.1By joining the OAS,2 Canada also joined the inter-American human rights system. While Canada has certainly been an important ally of the system, it has often been criticized for its timid membership. This article will discuss Canada's policy towards the OAS human rights regime, touching upon the regime's successes and weaknesses. It will also try to contextualize the discussion in light of Canada's broader policy towards human rights and Latin America.THE INTER-AMERICAN HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEMThe inter-American system of protection of human rights is generally considered to be composed of the norms and institutions created by the OAS to promote and protect human rights within the hemisphere. The main normative instruments dealing with human rights are the OAS charter, several human rights treaties, including the American Convention on Human Rights, as well as of other instruments, including the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man.3The inter-American commission on human rights, composed of seven elected independent experts (commissioners), is the principal organ of the OAS charged with ensuring the protection of human rights in the hemisphere. It also serves as a consultative organ of the organization on this matter. It promotes human rights in the region, formulates recommendations to member states, observes human rights situations, including via in loco visits. It publishes reports on thematic issues or the human rights situation in a specific country, etc. In recent years, the commission's main activity has been to process petitions lodged against member states by individuals and groups alleging violations of inter- American human rights norms. (In order to do so, complainants must first exhaust domestic remedies nationally, or be unable to do so). The inter-American commission on human rights can refer cases to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and, in serious and urgent cases that may cause irreparable harm to persons, it can adopt precautionary measures. The commission reports annually to the OAS general assembly.The Inter- American Court of Human Rights, composed of seven elected independent judges, rules on contentious cases between the commission and member states regarding allegations of violations of the rights contained in the inter- American instruments that grant it jurisdiction to do so. To be subject to the court's jurisdiction, a state must first have ratified the convention and expressly recognized the jurisdiction of the court. The court can issue an order or judgment, which is binding for states as a matter of public international law. The court can also adopt advisory opinions regarding the interpretation of the convention, or any other instrument related to human rights in the Americas, at the request of the commission or any member state. The court can also be consulted by member states regarding the compatibility of one of its laws with the convention. In serious and urgent cases, the court can also adopt provisional measures. The court reports annually to the OAS general assembly. …