Birkbeck Law Review
  • Home
  • About
    • Submissions
    • Join Us
  • Publications
    • Volume 7 Issue 1
    • Volume 6 Issue 1
    • Volume 5 Issue 1
    • Volume 4 Issue 1
    • Volume 3 Issue 2
    • Volume 3 Issue 1
    • Volume 2 Issue 2
    • Volume 2 Issue 1
    • Volume 1 Issue 2
    • Volume 1 Issue 1
  • Conference
    • 2019 Dystopias here and now
    • 2017 Law and the City
    • 2015 Migration, Borders, Violence
    • 2014 Privacy and Surveillance
  • Blog
  • Contact

Volume 7 Issue 1 November 2020​

What can the European Court of Human Rights learn from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights' approach to reparation in Indigenous peoples’ rights decisions?

SALLY ROSA
DOWNLOAD PDF
This article compares the approaches of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights with European Court of Human Rights in reparations decisions for Indigenous peoples. The judicial activism in the IACtHR is often seen as progressive and a blueprint for other courts. The apparent successes in the IACtHR are marred by paternalistic decisions, for example giving land access without ownership and reparations which are inconsistent with need. The ECtHR has been less effective in recognising the complex nature of Indigenous societies and this paper argues there is a need for courts to learn from one another.
Back

Site Map
Home
About
Submissions
Join Us
Blog
Publications
Events
Contact
Mailing Address 
Birkbeck Law Review
Birkbeck, University of London
Malet Street
London WC1E 7HX
United Kingdom
 

Contact Us:
admin@bbklr.org


Subscribe
Stay in touch with the latest news and information from the Birkbeck Law Review
Join our Mailing List
Copyright © 2012 - 2020 Birkbeck Law Review | A Publication of the Birkbeck Law Review Trust | (Print) ISSN 2052-1308 (Online) ISSN 2052-1316
All images, unless otherwise attributed, and the Birkbeck Law Review logo are © the Birkbeck Law Review and are NOT licensed under Creative Commons. All rights reserved.