Jurisprudence Database
The Jurisprudence Database sets out leading judgments and commentary by international and domestic legal mechanisms in the field of enforced disappearances. It summarises factual and legal findings and identifies common themes and search terms allowing for a comparative cross-jurisdictional analysis of this area of law. Users can search the source bank through a filter-based or key-term search and access text in English, Spanish, Russian and French.
Search the PDF content in documents uploaded to the Enforced Disappearance Legal Database.
Filter by Show Filters
Country
Case Decision Year
Keywords
Key Judgment
Types of Source
Authority
Themes
Şeker v. Turkey
The Court found that there was insufficient evidentiary basis on which to conclude that the victim was abducted and subsequently killed by State agents. Although there was no proof that the victim had been killed, the Court reaffirmed that the more time passes without any news of the disappeared, the greater the likelihood that the victim died, and recalled how procedural obligations are not confined to cases which concern intentional killings resulting from the use of force by agents of the State, but also apply to cases where a person has disappeared in circumstances which may be regarded as life-threatening. ...click to read more
Evidence | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate | Duty to Prosecute
Boucherf v. Algeria
The Committee held that incommunicado detention amounts to an arbitrary deprivation of liberty. The Committee also found a violation of the prohibition of inhuman treatment both in relation to the disappeared person due to his disappearance, and the prevention of contact with his family and the outside world. The Committee also found such violations with respect of family members due to the anguish and stress caused by the disappearance of their relative and the continued uncertainty concerning his fate and whereabouts.
Deprivation of Liberty | Refusal to Disclose Fate | Relatives as Victims | State/Non-State Agents | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate | Duty to Prosecute | Amnesties | Burden of Proof
Bousroual v. Algeria
The Committee held that the burden of proof cannot rest solely on the applicant of the communication. This is due to the fact that the applicant and the state party do not always have equal access to the evidence and that frequently the state party alone has access to the relevant information.
Burden of Proof | Admissibility | Evidence | Judicial Protection | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate
Sankara et al. v. Burkina Faso
The Committee found the communication admissible ratione temporis insofar as the violations resulting from the failure to conduct an inquiry, initiated before the Covenant and the Optional Protocol entered into force for the State, continued thereafter. The Committee found that the refusal to conduct an investigation into the death of the victim, the lack of official recognition of his place of burial and the failure to correct his death certificate constituted inhuman treatment of his family members. While confirming that the right to security applies even outside the context of formal deprivations of liberty, and therefore the State has to ...click to read more
Judicial Protection | Relatives as Victims | Right to Know the Truth | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate | Admissibility | Statute of Limitations
Castillo Páez
The Court established that one of the accused, Mr. Juan Carlos Mejía León, intervened in the events as part of a special training unit of the police with de facto powers to intervene in the context of terrorist attacks. It added that, since the operation which led to the victim’s disappearance was carried out in response to an unplanned event such as the terrorist attack, it was possible to infer that power was held by Mr. Mejía León as the highest-ranking officer of such special unit. The Court further established that the victim, after having been arrested, was handed over ...click to read more
Systemic Practice | Reparations | Crimes Against Humanity
Gongadze v. Ukraine
The Court was satisfied that police officers were involved in the victim's disappearance and murder, and found that the authorities failed to comply with their positive obligation to protect him from a known risk to his life. This was based on the fact that they ought to have been aware of the vulnerable position of a political journalist vis-à-vis those in power, and the fact that they ignored the victim's claims of being threatened and under surveillance. The Court also found a procedural violation of the right to life, holding that for years the authorities were more preoccupied with proving ...click to read more
Relatives as Victims | Right to Know the Truth | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate | Duty to Prosecute | Reparations | Obligation to Prevent | Deprivation of Liberty | Refusal to Disclose Fate
Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia
The Court found the State responsible for the acts of the paramilitary group because it did not diligently adopt the necessary measures to protect the civilian population, including the right to life, in this case. The Court highlighted that despite some State efforts to prohibit, prevent and punish the activities of such groups, by having encouraged their creation in the first place, the State created a dangerous situation for its inhabitants and failed to adopt all the necessary or sufficient measures to avoid these groups continuing to cause harm. The Court found that such a situation heightened the State’s special ...click to read more
Children/Youth | Deprivation of Liberty | Judicial Protection | State/Non-State Agents | Obligation to Prevent
General Comment on Article 18 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
The General Comment require states to abstain from passing amnesty or pardon laws that would exempt the perpetrators of enforced disappearances from criminal proceedings and sanctions and provide impunity. Mitigating circumstances and pardons can be allowed under Articles 4(2) and 18(2) of the Declaration.
Guarantees Against Impunity | Amnesties
Tanis and Others v. Turkey
The Court found the State responsible for the disappearance of the two men, finding a violation of the right to life in relation to both its substantive and procedural branches. The Court further held that the victim's unexplained disappearances after having been for the last time entering a gendarmerie station constituted a particularly grave violation of their right to liberty and security.
Deprivation of Liberty | Judicial Protection | Relatives as Victims | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate | Burden of Proof
Blanco Romero et al. v. Venezuela
The State fully acknowledged its responsibility for the facts. As part of the reparations, the Court ordered an investigation into the facts; the identification, prosecution and punishment of those responsible; and the location of the victims' whereabouts.
Punishment | Deprivation of Liberty | Right to Know the Truth | Duty to Investigate