This article examines the phenomenon of digital disinformation in contemporary Brazilian politics, with particular attention to the instrumentalization of fake news by far-right movements and its impact on the legitimacy of democratic institutions. It is grounded on the premise that freedom of expression, although a fundamental right and a cornerstone of the Democratic State of Law, is not absolute and must be interpreted in harmony with the protection of democracy, human dignity, and the integrity of public deliberation. The study adopts a qualitative, legal-dogmatic, and bibliographical approach, combining doctrinal and jurisprudential analysis, particularly drawing from decisions of the Brazilian Supreme Court and standards of the Inter-American Human Rights System. It investigates the role of the State in addressing organized disinformation, distinguishing prior censorship from democratic and proportional accountability. The article concludes that combating fake news is a constitutional duty to safeguard democracy, requiring coordinated institutional action, media education, and proportionate regulation of digital platforms, thereby preserving freedom of expression in its ethical and democratic dimension.

Abstract This paper analyses the role of the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) in the context of the new rise of authoritarian populism in the region. It argues that delays can be one of the factors affecting the responsiveness of the IAHRS in the context of democratic setbacks. Based on data regarding Brazilian cases, our findings suggest that during Jair Bolsonaro’s government (2019–2022) the IAHRS was as reactive as outside this period, which would indicate that the existing delays of the system are not significantly affected by the particularities of the government and are less a circumstantial than a structural problem of the system. The Priority Policy adopted in December 2023 indicates, however, that solutions can be not only structural but also circumstantial to allow the IAHRS to be more responsive during specific contexts, such as the one related to new rise of authoritarian populism.

This article examines how epistemic violence operates within the Inter-American Human Rights System through the systematic marginalisation of Indigenous knowledge systems. Despite progressive jurisprudence on Indigenous rights, the Inter-American system perpetuates colonial hierarchies through its epistemological foundations. Drawing upon Third World approaches to international law (TWAIL), Indigenous legal theory and decolonial scholarship, the analysis reveals patterns of implementation failure rooted in fundamental incompatibilities between Western legal categories and Indigenous cosmovisions. Through an examination of Brazilian cases and Latin American Indi­genous legal philosophies – particularly concepts of Buen Vivir, ayllu governance and more-than-human personhood – the research demonstrates alternative frameworks for understanding law, justice and human–nature relationships. Contemporary innovations in epistemic inclusion suggest pathways towards transformation, yet remain constrained by underlying Western epistemological structures. Achieving genuine epistemic justice requires fundamental reconceptualisation of international human rights law to accommodate pluriversal approaches recognising multiple, equally valid systems of legal knowledge and practice.

In July 03, 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) recognized for the first time a right to a healthy climate in its Advisory Opinion No. 32 (2025) on the “Climate Emergency and Human Rights”. The IACtHR derived the standalone right to a healthy climate from the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, which the International Court of Justice in its 2025 Advisory Opinion on “Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change” considered “a precondition for the enjoyment of many human rights, such as the right to life, the right to health and the right to an adequate standard of living, including access to water, food and housing.” Based on these developments, authors trace the emergence of the right to a safe climate within and outside the Inter-American Human Rights System, both in scholarly works and domestic case law. We then examine the nature and content of the right to a safe climate, including new right holders, duty bearers and corresponding obligations that stem from this right. In this sense, the authors depart from the IACtHR's proposition and detect lacunae and corresponding opportunities for the right's further development in theory and practice. Finally, the authors analyse how this rights revolution sparked by the IACtHR Opinion may boost rights-based climate litigation, as it moves from aspiration to enforceable law.

Abstract Transitional justice has become the legal and moral grammar for articulating victims’ demands for justice in conflict-affected societies. Yet it is a grammar that deftly places the responsibility for addressing impoverished victims’ main concerns, namely economic and social rights (ESR), in other fields. This is largely possible thanks to the ‘separability thesis’, according to which ESR and reparations are conceptually distinct, and therefore the guarantee of ESR cannot be considered a means of reparation. This thesis, now widely accepted by scholars, UN special procedures, and the Inter-American Human Rights System, places victims in a situation where they can be repaired while remaining poor. This article critically examines the development of this thesis during the encounter with transitional justice in Colombia and clarifies the important role it has played in the remaking of the field and its application in conflict-affected societies. Drawing on the lessons of this conceptual history, the article argues for the development of a framework that articulates victims’ everyday ESR claims in terms of reparation, and explores human rights bodies, traditionally neglected in the transitional justice literature, that are well suited for this purpose. Reconsidering the separability thesis requires rethinking the state–individual relationship, understanding state power not only as a source of mistrust and a target of stigmatization, but also as an active agent in addressing socioeconomic wrongs. With this shift, the article anchors the literature on transformative reparations within the normative framework of the ICESCR, while acknowledging the realpolitik constraints that affect the guarantee of ESR.

This study analyzes the main differences and overlaps between the Brazilian Amnesty Law (Law No. 6,683/79) and international human rights legislation, with an emphasis on the Inter-American Human Rights System of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Global System of the United Nations. The objective is to understand the differences between Brazilian legislation and human rights regulations, with a view to identifying the impacts of these differences on Brazilian justice. In this way, the aim is to present the general aspects of the Amnesty Law, to understand how international human rights treaties act in institutional crises, in addition to comparing Brazilian law with international treaties on the subject. Deductive reasoning was used as a research method, which allows an analysis focused on correlating Brazilian legislation and international commitments to explain how the implementation of the Law in Brazil conflicts with international legislation. The results of the research indicate the complexity and duality of the Brazilian Amnesty Law, which is important in the historical transitional period, but which impedes justice in the country, with the accountability of agents who committed crimes against humanity and reparations to victims, their families and descendants. The Amnesty Law, analyzed constitutionally and in light of the international treaties ratified by the country, should be revised.

Informed consent is presented as a fundamental right and principle in modern medical practice. It involves obtaining permission from a patient before any medical procedure, treatment, or research protocol. Although not explicitly recognized as a standalone right in international human rights instruments, informed consent in healthcare is considered a right derived from other rights, such as the rights to health and freedom. The jurisprudence of international human rights courts has permitted the reinterpretation of informed consent beyond just a bioethical principle. This article argues for the normative recognition of informed consent as a self-standing human right, rather than simply a derivative right or an ethical guideline. It does this by analyzing related cases from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to demonstrate how its jurisprudence, though often linking informed consent to related rights like health, personal integrity, and self-determination, supports an understanding of informed consent as a distinct and fundamental right. The source also mentions that its recognition as a right in fundamental laws, such as the Colombian Constitution, should be achieve through the application of these international standards or via the concept of emerging rights.

This article analyzes how the state of emergency, designed by the Constitution as an extraordinary, limited, and temporary mechanism to respond to real threats against democratic order and citizen security, has become a common practice in public administration in present-day Ecuador. Using a qualitative, legal-documentary methodology, the article examines the national legal framework, the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, and the parameters established by the Inter-American human rights system, while also analyzing the recurrent use of emergency decrees in response to rising crime, social protests, and the health emergency. The findings show that the use of exceptional measures has expanded in both frequency and scope, resulting in the militarization of internal security functions, severe restrictions on constitutional guarantees, and a marked gap between the regulatory framework presented as protective of rights and its actual implementation. Furthermore, the ambivalent role of the Constitutional Court is highlighted, as while it has established more rigorous standards of control, these have not been sufficient to prevent the normalization of extraordinary measures.The analysis argues that this trend is generating a gradual deterioration of democratic institutions and compromising the effectiveness of security policies. Therefore, the study proposes the need to restore the strictly exceptional nature of the state of emergency, strengthen prior and concurrent controls, and consolidate a security approach that cannot be separated from the full and effective respect for human rights.

Reconciliation in a transition requires interconnected events and processes to enable peaceful coexistence and restore trust in State institutions after a period of systematic violations to human rights. It involves articulating different transitional justice mechanisms. Prosecutions, truth commissions, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence must be implemented comprehensively, ensuring victims’ families feel repaired. The absence of this balance hinders reconciliation. This research explores the participation of victims and their relatives in proceedings before the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) and the implementation of reparations as mechanisms for reconciliation. The study argues that victims’ relatives and survivors’ input in legal proceedings and horizontal relationships with legal representation foster agency and dignity, enabling reconciliation. Whereas full engagement in the IAHRS process promotes an inclusive legal environment, failure to implement Court-mandated reparations obstructs reconciliation with State institutions and the idea of justice itself, causing disillusionment. Received: 15 May 2025; Accepted: 19 November 2025

Introduction: The transformative role of the Inter-American Human Rights System (IACHR) has favored the incorporation of international parameters of respect, protection and promotion of social rights, including in the labor field. From this perspective, the scope of this article is to examine the potential of the technique of diffuse conventionality control for the application of International Labor Organization (ILO) guidelines by domestic courts, focusing on the case of Employees of the Santo Antônio de Jesus Fire Factory and their families v. Brazil. Objective: To analyze the possibility of applying conventionality control using ILO standards as a parameter. Methodology: The research adopts the deductive method, through a bibliographical and jurisprudential review, with a dogmatic approach to law. Results: Based on the materials surveyed, it can be seen that the technique of conventionality control is recognized, by the case law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), as a duty of Brazilian judges, which favors the internalization of international commitments made before the ILO and their application by the Judiciary. Conclusion: From all the above, it can be concluded that conventionality control is an effective mechanism for integrating domestic law and international human rights law. From the analysis of the case of the Employees of the Santo Antônio de Jesus Fire Factory, we can see the high potential of conventionality control based on the the ILO's guidelines. KEYWORDS: conventionality control; Inter-American Human Rights System; international human rights law; International Labor Organization; labor law.

The article analyzes the evolution of the right to identity in the Ecuadorian legal system and its tension with the action of challenging paternity, from a neo-constitutional and human rights perspective. Starting from the conception of identity as a set of features that make a person unique, it examines its transition from a civil and legalistic right to a fundamental right with constitutional status, especially since the 2008 Constitution and the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The study explores the role of the Inter-American human rights system and the doctrine of the best interests of the child in shaping a rights-based model that prioritizes the comprehensive protection of children and adolescents in the face of attempts to challenge voluntary recognition based solely on DNA testing. Likewise, it analyzes the Organic Law on Identity and Civil Data Management, the reforms to the Civil Code, and Resolution 05-2014 of the National Court of Justice, which restrict the legal standing of the recognizer to contest the filial bond. Finally, comparative law (Colombia and Argentina) is used to show a regional trend toward consolidating identity as a core axis that articulates other fundamental rights.

In this paper, we analyze what we consider to be weaknesses of the Inter-American system to reflect on the changes that could strengthen it. As part of these weaknesses, we refer to its membership, which has been declining over time, and to the lack of compliance with its jurisprudential decisions. In the interest of defending human rights, we must reflect on the changes or improvements necessary to achieve effective compliance with the obligations assumed by the members of the current Interamerican system of human rights. As a point of reference, we mention some aspects of the European Court of Human Rights.

In 2013, Argentina enacted Law 26862, guaranteeing access to assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) but it does not include preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). Judicial rulings have denied PGT coverage, citing legal protections for embryos and the absence of explicit regulatory approval. However, this paper argues that PGT should be included under Argentina’s current ART framework, in alignment with human rights principles, scientific progress, and reproductive autonomy. Analyzing domestic legislation and the inter-American human rights system—particularly the case of Artavia Murillo v. Costa Rica—the paper demonstrates that restricting PGT disproportionately harms individuals with genetic risks, violating their rights to health, privacy, and family life. The judiciary’s reliance on “life at conception” arguments is further undermined by Argentina’s 2020 abortion law, which permits pregnancy termination. By comparing Argentina’s approach to the UK’s regulated PGT model, the paper advocates for the Ministry of Health to authorize PGT under strict criteria, ensuring equitable access while addressing ethical concerns. Recommendations include adopting evidence-based regulations to balance reproductive rights with embryo welfare, thereby advancing progressive health policies in line with international human rights standards.

Introduction: The consolidation of multilevel constitutionalism, driven by the coexistence of multiple legal orders, presents challenges to the performance of Brazilian courts, particularly regarding the incorporation of international human rights protection standards. This challenge becomes especially relevant in decisions involving social and labor rights, which are traditionally marked by structural inequalities. Objective: This study investigates how the Superior Labor Court (TST) and the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) uphold multilevel constitutionalism through the application of conventionality control, based on the observance of precedents from the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS), and how this practice fosters the integration between domestic norms and the precedents established by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), with emphasis on its manifestation in the context of labor relations. Methodology: The research adopts a qualitative approach, employing both dogmatic and empirical methods. It relies on a specialized literature review and the analysis of case law from the STJ and TST, examining the application of conventionality control both in abstracto and in concreto, along with its practical constraints. The empirical dimension considers data from the National Council of Justice (CNJ) regarding the application of the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) and the case law of the IACtHR in Brazil. Results: The analysis reveals a fragmented pattern of internalization of the IACtHR’s jurisprudence. A predominance of in concreto application of precedents is observed, to the detriment of a systematic and preventive in abstracto conventionality control. Conclusion: The study concludes that, despite progress, there remains a deficit in the internalization of the IACtHR’s jurisprudence. This limitation significantly impacts the effectiveness of fundamental rights guarantees, particularly in the realm of labor relations, where conventionality control could play a more consistent role. KEYWORDS: conventionality control; multilevel constitutionalism; human rights; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; international jurisprudence.

Abstract As it occurs in any democracy, each State has a particular regulation of the scope of the rights recognized in its constitution and secondary legislation. However, the existence of regional and universal jurisdictions that address human rights to which States have a membership presents a broader view of interpreting these rights and enables a complementary vision with each constitutional system. The right to freedom of association is one example, and this analysis will address it, focusing on the Inter-American System of Human Rights, particularly the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) decisions. This analysis will serve as an initial approach to the evolution of the IACtHR’s interpretation concerning the right to freedom of association, starting with laying down its normative basis in the Inter-American System of Human Rights and later focusing on the decisions of the cases published by the IACtHR addressing this right between 2001–2022.

The research focuses on the protection of human rights and the reform movements regarding criminal justice systems in Latin America. Its objective is to evaluate the relationship between the Inter-American Human Rights System and the reform movements, in the Latin American context. Thus, methodologically, the work addresses the experience of the Uruguayan criminal justice system movement, by the analysis of the Peirano Basso v. Uruguay case, to understand the relationship between the decisions of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the local reform movement. In conclusion, based on the study of the parameters defined by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the Uruguayan case, it is presented the existence of a correlation between the actions of the Inter-American System and the accusatory reform in that country, indicating the possibilities of supranational dialogue for the expansion of the protection of human rights in Latin America.

Restorative justice is gaining increasing relevance within the Inter-American human rights system, emerging as a complementary—and in some cases, alternative—paradigm to traditional retributive justice.

Human trafficking is a serious violation of human rights that undermines the dignity, freedom, and integrity of victims. This multi-offensive crime has been addressed by the Inter-American Human Rights System through various cases, establishing standards on the obligations of States in terms of prevention, investigation, punishment, and reparation. This article analyzes the development of these standards, with particular emphasis on the judgments of the cases "Workers of Hacienda Brasil Verde Vs. Brazil", "Ramírez Escobar et al. Vs. Guatemala", and "López Soto et al. vs. Venezuela". Based on a systematic analysis of these decisions, the key principles and obligations that should guide the state response to human trafficking are identified, such as due diligence, gender perspective, and comprehensive protection of victims. Likewise, it reflects on the challenges and opportunities for the effective application of these standards in the current context, providing concrete recommendations to strengthen the fight against this scourge from a human rights approach.

The Importance of the 24/17 Advisory Opinion (AO) of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for the Gender Debate in Brazil: An Analysis in the Light of the Declaratory Action of Unconstitutionality (DAU) 4275

In response to the alarmingly high rates of sexual violence against girls and women in Latin America, the Inter-American human rights system is developing standards and remedies to address these issues since states have already recognized their rights, but this has not been enough. This article examines the only three cases in which the IACtHR has addressed sexual violence against girls, “V.R.P., V.P.C., and others vs. Nicaragua,” “Guzmán Albarracin vs. Ecuador,” and “Angulo Losada vs. Bolivia.” It highlights some of the achievements including the concept of intersectionality, the intensified due diligence due to their status as girls, the role of combined stereotypes, and others. It also focuses on areas for ongoing improvement such as the definition of institutional violence, the application of Article 5.2 of the ACHR concerning the conceptualization of torture, and the need for transformative reparations in the prevention of violence against girls in the Inter-American Court’s approach.