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
Mouvement Burkinabé des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples v. Burkina Faso
The Commission found that enforced disappearances comprise violations of the rules of international law, especially those that guarantee the right to recognition of legal status, the right not to be subjected to torture or any other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment, and the right to liberty and security of the person. The Commission also cited the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons Against Forced Disappearances in the context of the physical integrity and security of the person.
Deprivation of Liberty | Juridical Personality | Systemic Practice | Refusal to Disclose Fate | Right to Know the Truth | Duty to Investigate | Duty to Prosecute | Reparations
Çiçek v. Turkey
The Court found that the unacknowledged detentions could be presumed to be life-threatening given the general context in south-east Turkey in 1994, the lack of accountability of members of the security forces during this time, and the fact that six and a half years had lapsed since the victims were last seen alive. The Court rejected the applicant's argument that there was a violation of Article 3 vis-à-vis her sons and grandson because the very fact of a disappearance in the context in south-east Turkey at the time must be deemed to have exposed the victims to psychological torture; there ...click to read more
Deprivation of Liberty | Evidence | Judicial Protection | Systemic Practice | Burden of Proof
General Comment on Article 17 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
The continuing and serious nature of enforced disappearance calls for a restrictive application of statutory limitation legislation. Such approaches must prevent perpetrators from abusing statute of limitations. The restrictive conditions of the application of statutes of limitation are complemented by the fact that enforced disappearance gravely infringes a series of other rights as per Article 1 of the Declaration.
Punishment | Admissibility | Statute of Limitations
Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala
The Court recalled that enforced or involuntary disappearance constitutes a multiple and continuous violation of several Convention rights. This is because it not only results in an arbitrary deprivation of liberty, but also endangers the personal integrity, security, and life of the detainee. Moreover, it places the victim in a state of complete defencelessness, entailing other related offences. Furthermore, the Court stated that when a State faces a rebel movement or terrorism threat which truly threatens its “independence or security”, it may restrict or temporarily suspend the exercise of certain human rights. However, enforced disappearances, summary executions and torture are ...click to read more
Deprivation of Liberty
Durand and Ugarte v. Peru
The Court found that although the suspension of judicial protection and guarantees in place during the state of emergency did not explicitly ban recourse to habeas corpus - this having been the ideal avenue for the victims' relatives to establish their whereabouts - the form and substance of these suspensions caused the recourse to habeas corpus to be inefficient. It also condemned the use of military courts to try the events of the prison riot, and found that military jurisdiction must be restrictive and exceptional in scope, limited to offences that concern the military order. In trying the events, the ...click to read more
Judicial Protection | Juridical Personality | Effective Remedy
Timurtas v. Turkey
The Court found that the period of time which has elapsed since a person was placed in detention, although not decisive in itself, is a relevant factor to be taken into account when determining whether a disappeared person may be presumed to have died while in state custody. The passage of time of unacknowledged detention may affect the weight the Court will attach to other circumstantial evidence. It reiterated that Article 13 requires the state to undertake a thorough and effective investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible and including effective access for the relatives ...click to read more
Evidence | Relatives as Victims | Effective Remedy | Duty to Investigate
Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey
The Court could not establish that State agents were involved in the victim's killing, but was able to draw strong inferences that the perpetrators were known to the authorities. It concluded that the authorities ought to have been aware of the possibility that the victim's right to life was at risk due to the activities carried out by “contra-guerrilla” groups targeting individuals perceived to be acting against State interests with the knowledge or acquiescence of the security forces. Taking into account that the situation in south-east Turkey at the time of the events undermined the effectiveness of the protection afforded ...click to read more
Duty to Investigate | Reparations | Burden of Proof | Obligation to Prevent | Evidence | Systemic Practice | State/Non-State Agents | Effective Remedy
Prosecutor v. Kupreškić et al.
Although the Statute of the Tribunal does not specifically include enforced disappearances in the list of acts that could constitute a crime against humanity, the Tribunal found that the massive and systematic practice of enforced disappearance amounted to "other inhumane acts" for the purposes of the definition of crime against humanity. In particular, the Tribunal argued that the category of ”other inhumane acts” was designed as a residual one, and that parameters for its interpretation could be identified according to international standards on human rights, which provide a set of basic rights pertaining to all human beings. According to the ...click to read more
Systemic Practice | Crimes Against Humanity
Caracazo v. Venezuela
The State fully acknowledged international responsibility regarding its obligation to respect the rights to life, personal integrity, personal liberty, judicial guarantees and judicial protection; and its duty to adopt domestic law provisions, which the Court accepted. Among the measures of reparation, the Court ruled that the State must locate, exhume, and identify the remains of the victims through the use of suitable techniques and instruments, and hand them over to their relatives. The Court found that the cost of the burial of the remains, in the place chosen by the next of kin, should be borne by the State.
Effective Remedy | Reparations | Deprivation of Liberty | Judicial Protection | Right to Know the Truth
Aceituno and Vasquez v. Chile
The Committee noted, notwithstanding that the state had not challenged the admissibility of the communication, that the acts giving rise to the claims related to the death of the victims took place prior to the international entry into force of the Covenant and prior to the entry into force of the Optional Protocol for Chile. For this reason, the Committee considered the claims inadmissible on ratione temporis grounds.
Admissibility