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
Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras
The Court established for the first time that enforced disappearances are a complex, multiple and continuous violation of the ACHR, constituting a radical breach of multiple provisions of the Convention and showing an abandonment of the values underpinning human dignity. The Court stated that domestic remedies must be "adequate", suitable to address an infringement of a legal right – and "effective" – meaning capable of producing the result for which it was designed. In terms of evidence, it stated that the standard of proof allows for reliance on circumstantial and presumptive evidence, the former being particularly important in cases ...click to read more
Burden of Proof | Duty to Investigate | Effective Remedy | Evidence | Judicial Protection | Juridical Personality | State/Non-State Agents | Systemic Practice
Blake v. Guatemala
The Court in this case recognised the next of kin of disappeared persons as victims. The Court stated that the suffering of Mr. Nicholas Blake’s relatives could be examined against the alleged violation of Article 5.1 because the impact on their mental and moral integrity was a direct consequence of his disappearance. It held that the circumstance of the disappearance caused suffering and anguish, and the authorities’ failure to investigate caused the family further anguish and frustration. The Court stated that the fact that the civil patrol – acting under the orders of the Guatemalan army – burned and destroyed ...click to read more
Economic/Social/Cultural Rights | Judicial Protection | Juridical Personality | Refusal to Disclose Fate | Relatives as Victims | Right to Know the Truth | State/Non-State Agents
Quinteros v. Uruguay
The Committee found that the anguish and stress caused to the family by the disappearance of their loved one and by the continuing uncertainty concerning their fate and whereabouts are a form of torture or other cruel and inhuman treatment.
Admissibility | Effective Remedy | Interim/Urgent Measures | Obligation to Prevent | Relatives as Victims | Right to Know the Truth
Bleier v. Uruguay
The Committee found that there are serious reasons to believe that a breach of the right to life occurred. Such finding was based on the substantial witness testimony who reported that the victim was subjected to severe torture and cruel treatment during detention. The Committee considered allegations as substantiated in the absence of satisfactory evidence and explanations to the contrary submitted by the state party.
Burden of Proof | Duty to Investigate | Evidence | Interim/Urgent Measures
United States of America v. Altstoetter and Others (also known as Justice Case No. 3)
The Tribunal found that the offenses carried out pursuant to the Night and Fog program were crimes against humanity, arguing that "systematic terrorism" against a civilian population was a criminal violation of the laws of humanity; internationally recognized human rights and; Control Council Law No. 10. Observing that the laws of war protect the civilian population of any territory occupied by an enemy force, the Tribunal also found that the implementation of the "Night and Fog" programme resulted in war crimes violating customary international law as articulated the 1907 Hague Regulations. In particular, the programme violated the prohibition to confine ...click to read more
Crimes Against Humanity | Refusal to Disclose Fate | Relatives as Victims | Systemic Practice
International Military Tribunal v. Goering and Others (also known as Nuremberg Judgment against Major War Criminals)
The Tribunal found that war crimes under its Charter were merely declaratory of the existing laws of war as expressed by the earlier Hague Regulations. It found that by 1939, these rules were recognised by nations and regarded as binding customary international law. It held that the issuance of the "Night and Fog" programme (see Facts of the Case) was a war crime violating "family honours and rights", and condemned it as a form of mistreatment inflicted upon both those who were disappeared, as well as their families.
Refusal to Disclose Fate | Relatives as Victims | Systemic Practice