Abstract
This paper presents case law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of Colombia during a 25-year period (1992 to 2017). By seriously contemplating the rights of indigenous peoples, afro-descendants and other cultural minorities, this study illustrates the standards of the afore-mentioned courts regarding prior and informed consultation and binding informed consent as an alternative to the problematic category of so-called “veto power”. In addition, it focuses on the principal outcomes of the landmark case Saramaka v. Suriname (2007) and decision T-129/11 Embera Katio v. Executive Power, which currently encompass the highest standard of protection. However, the outcomes of judicial dialogue are at risk of being annulled. The problematic situations of these minorities and the inadequate application of a prior consultation requirement highlights the relevance of articulating standards in the transnational arena and within the framework of a broader Ius Constitutionale Commune en America Latina.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
