Email this article 
Hide
Show all
LA CONFRONTACIÓN A LA DISCRIMINACIÓN INTERSECCIONAL EN EL SISTEMA INTERAMERICANO DE DERECHOS HUMANOS: APORTACIONES DE LA CORTE IDH A LA CONSTRUCCIÓN DEL DERECHO ANTIDISCRIMINATORIO
Abstract
Objetivo: Analizar el abordaje de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (Corte IDH) sobre la discriminación interseccional a partir de tres decisiones que recogen disposiciones sobre la no discriminación y la garantía de la igualdad.
Metodología: Se trata de investigación de carácter crítico, descriptivo y explicativo a través del análisis cualitativo del contenido de las decisiones judiciales de la Corte IDH con el soporte del marco analítico de las perspectivas interseccionales. Se adopta el enfoque dialéctico para problematizar la relación entre los paradigmas interseccionales consolidados en la literatura y su aplicación por parte de los jueces en las fuentes primarias de este estudio.
Resultados: Por un lado, la aplicación del paradigma interseccional se ha sofisticado para analizar de forma más compleja el cruce de las causas prohibidas de discriminación, así como para determinar mejor el alcance de las responsabilidades estatales respeto a las vulneraciones de derechos humanos. Por otro lado, identifican tanto la prevalencia de los paradigmas unitario y múltiple sobre la discriminación en los tratados multilaterales de derechos humanos (TMDH) del Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos (SIDH) cuanto la restricción del desarrollo del enfoque interseccional las decisiones de la Corte IDH.
Contribuciones: La investigación posibilita visibilizar las aportaciones y los límites del enfrentamiento a la discriminación interseccional por parte de la Corte IDH. Con esto, permite desvendar los problemas que dificultan la cobertura de la complejidad de las discriminaciones que sufren los titulares de derechos y, de esta forma, contribuir de forma más efectiva para la construcción del Derecho antidiscriminatorio no solamente en el marco de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA), sino también para la comunidad internacional.
Palabras claves: Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos; Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos; Derecho antidiscriminatorio; discriminación interseccional.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To analyze the approach of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) regarding intersectional discrimination based on three decisions that contain provisions on non-discrimination and the guarantee of equality.
Methodology: This is critical, descriptive, and explanatory research through qualitative analysis of the content of the judicial decisions of the IACHR supported by the analytical framework of intersectional perspectives. A dialectical approach is adopted to problematize the relationship between the intersectional paradigms consolidated in the literature and their application by judges in the primary sources of this study.
Results: On one hand, the application of the intersectional paradigm has been refined to analyze the intersection of prohibited causes of discrimination more complexly, as well as to better determine the scope of state responsibilities regarding human rights violations. On the other hand, they identify both the prevalence of unitary and multiple paradigms on discrimination in multilateral human rights treaties (MHRTs) of the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) and the restriction of the development of the intersectional approach in the decisions of the IACtHR.
Contributions: The research makes it possible to visualize the contributions and limitations of addressing intersectional discrimination by the IACtHR. Thus, it reveals the problems that hinder the coverage of the complexity of the discriminations suffered by rights holders and, thereby, contributes more effectively to the construction of anti-discriminatory law not only within the framework of the Organization of American States (OAS) but also for the international community.
Keywords: Inter-American Human Rights System; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; anti-discriminatory law; intersectional discrimination.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDF (Español (España))References
ALKUWARI, Buthaina Mohammed. Human Rights of Women: Intersectionality and the CEDAW. International Review of Law, [S. l.], v. 11, n. 2, 2022.
AMBRUS, Mónika; WESSEL, Ramses A. Between pragmatism and predictability: Temporariness in international law. Netherlands yearbook of international law, 45, p. 1-17, 2014.
ATREY, Shreya. Intersectional discrimination. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
BOND, Johanna. International intersectionality: A theoretical and pragmatic exploration of women's international human rights violations. Emory Law Journal, v. 52, n. 71, 2003.
BÜRKNER, Hans‐Joachim. Intersectionality: How gender studies might inspire the analysis of social inequality among migrants. Population, space and place, v. 18, n. 2, p. 181-195, 2012.
CARASTATHIS, Anna. Intersectionality: Origins, Contestations, Horizons, University of Nebraska Press. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2016.
CARBIN, Maria; SARA, Edenheim. The intersectional turn in feminist theory: A dream of a common language? European Journal of Women's Studies, v. 20, n. 3, p. 233-248, 2013.
CHANTER, Tina. Gender: Key concepts in philosophy. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2007.
CHO, Sumi; CRENSHAW, Kimberlé Williams; MCCALL, Leslie. Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis. Signs: Journal of women in culture and society, v. 38, n. 4, p. 785-810, 2013.
COLLINS, Patricia Hill. Black Feminist Thought: knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. 2 ed. London: Routledge, 2000.
COLLINS, Patricia Hill. Intersectionality as critical inquiry. In: NAPLES, Nancy A. Companion to feminist studies. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, p. 105-128, 2021.
COLLINS, Patricia Hill; BILGE, Sirma. Interseccionalidade, São Paulo: Boitempo, 2020.
CONAGHAN, Joanne. Intersectionality and the Feminist Project in Law. In: GRABHAM, Emily; COOPER, Davina; KRISHNADAS, Jane; HERMAN, Didi. Law, Power and the Politics of Subjectivity. London: Routledge. p. 21–48, 2008.
CORTE IDH. Caso Gonzales Lluy y otros Vs. Ecuador. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 1 de septiembre de 2015. Serie C No. 298, 2015.
CORTE IDH. Caso de los Empleados de la Fábrica de Fuegos de Santo Antônio de Jesus y sus familiares Vs. Brasil. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 15 de julio de 2020. Serie C No. 407, 2020.
CORTE IDH. Caso Manuela y otros Vs. Ecuador. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 2 de noviembre de 2021. Serie C No. 441, 2021.
CRENSHAW, Kimberlé. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Univeristy of Chicago Legal Forum, issue 21, p. 139-167, 1989.
CRENSHAW, Kimberlé. Documento para o encontro de especialistas em aspectos da discriminação racial relativos ao gênero. Revista estudos feministas, v. 10, n. 1, p. 171-188, 2002.
CRENSHAW, Kimberle. Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, v. 43, n. 6, p. 1241–1299, 1991.
DAVIS, Aisha Nicole. Intersectionality and international law: recognizing complex identities on the global stage. Harvard Human Rights Journal, v. 28, n. 1, p. 205-248, 2015.
DAVIS, Kathy. Intersectionality as critical methodology. In: LYKKE, Nina. Writing Academic Texts Differently. New York: Routledge, p. 17-29, 2014.
DE BECO, Gauthier. Protecting the invisible: an intersectional approach to international human rights law. Human Rights Law Review, v. 17, n. 4, p. 633-663, 2017.
DENIS, Ann. Review essay: Intersectional analysis: A contribution of feminism to sociology. International Sociology, v. 23, n. 5, p. 677-694, 2008.
HANCOCK, Ange-Marie. Intersectionality as a normative and empirical paradigm. Politics & Gender, v. 3, n. 2, p. 248-254, 2007a.
HANCOCK, Ange-Marie. When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, v. 5, n. 1, p. 63–79, 2007b.
HARRIS, Angelique; SUSANNAH, Bartlow. Intersectionality: Race, gender, sexuality, and class. In: DELAMATER, John; PLANTE, Rebecca F. Handbook of the sociology of sexualities, New York: Springer, p. 261-271, 2015.
HOLZLEITHNER, Elisabeth. Law and social justice: intersectional dimensions. In: DAVIS, Kathy; LUTZ, Helma. The Routledge international handbook of intersectionality studies. New York: Routledge, p. 251-263, 2023.
MACKINNON, Catharine A. Intersectionality as method: A note. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, v. 38, n. 4, p. 1019-1030, 2013.
MAKKONEN, Timo. Multiple, compound and Intersectional discrimination: bringing the experiences of the most marginalized to the fore. Finlandia: Institute for Human Rights, Abo Akademi University, 2002.
MARTÍNEZ, Fernando Rey. La discriminación múltiple, una realidad antigua, un concepto nuevo. Revista española de derecho constitucional, v. 84, p. 251-283, 2008.
MCCALL, Leslie. The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of women in culture and society, v. 30, n. 3, p. 1771-1800, 2005.
MOODLEY, Jacqueline; GRAHAM, Lauren. The importance of intersectionality in disability and gender studies. Agenda, v. 29, n. 2, p. 24-33, 2015.
YOCHAY, Nadan; KORBIN, Jill. Cultural context, intersectionality, and child vulnerability. Childhood vulnerability journal, v.1, n. 1, p. 5-14, 2008.
O’CINNEIDE, Colm. The Potential and Pitfalls of Intersectionality in the Context of Social Rights Adjudication. In: ATREY, Shreya; DUNNE, Peter. Intersectionality and Human Rights Law, Oxford: Hart Publishing, p. 59–82, 2020.
OEA. Convención Interamericana Contra el Racismo y la Discriminación Racial y Formas Conexas de Intolerancia. La Antigua (Guatemala), 5 de junio de 2013.
OEA. Convención Interamericana Contra Toda Forma de Discriminación e Intolerancia. La Antigua (Guatemala), 5 de junio de 2013.
OEA. Convención Interamericana sobre la Protección de los Derechos Humanos de las Personas Mayores. Washington (Estados Unidos), 15 de junio de 2015.
OEA. Declaración Americana de los Derechos y Deberes del Hombre, 2 de mayo de 1948
ONU. Carta de las Naciones Unidas, 26 de junio de 1945.
ONU. Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas. Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos. Resolución 217 (III) de 10 de diciembre de 1948.
RICE, Carla; HARRISON, Elisabeth; FRIEDMAN, May. Doing Justice to Intersectionality in Research. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, v. 19, n. 6, p. 409-420, 2019.
TRUSCAN, Ivona; BOURKE-MARTIGNONI, Joanna. International Human Rights Law and Intersectional Discrimination. The Equal Rights Review, v. 16, p. 103-131, 2016.
USERA, Raúl Leopoldo Canosa. Igualdad y no discriminación en el Derecho internacional de los Derechos Humanos. Revista Europea de Derechos Fundamentales, n. 11, p. 39-66, 2008.
VERLOO, Mieke. Intersectional and cross-movement politics and policies: Reflections on current practices and debates. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, v. 38, n. 4, p. 893-915, 2013.
VIGOYA, Mara Viveiros. Interseccionalidad. Giro decolonial y comunitario. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: CLACSO, 2023.
VIVES, Francisco Pascual. Consenso e interpretación evolutiva de los tratados regionales de derechos humanos. Revista Española de Derecho Internacional, v. 66, n. 2, p. 113-153, 2014.
YUVAL-DAVIS, Nira. Intersectionality and feminist politics. European journal of women's studies, v. 13, n. 3, p. 193-209, 2006.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26668/revistajur.2316-753X.v3i80.6875
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Revista Jurídica e-ISSN: 2316-753X
Rua Chile, 1678, Rebouças, Curitiba/PR (Brasil). CEP 80.220-181
