Impunity in cases of serious human rights violations: three relevant aspects of contention in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) is a pioneer in international human rights law in developing jurisprudence against impunity. Since the 1970s, the American continent has been prone to political and policymaking processes to ensure impunity for those responsible for serious human rights violations. This impunity has aimed at, among others, enforcing amnesty and self-amnesty laws or implementing procedural institutions (such as the ne bis in idem principle) that intend to prevent the investigation and punishment of those responsible for serious human rights violations. The paper examines the jurisprudence of the IACtHR to determine some fundamental lines of argument that seek to combat impunity in cases of serious human rights violations. To this end, it emphasizes the particularities of the duty to investigate established by the IACtHR, the development of jus cogens in relation to these serious situations, and the scope of reparations. From a comparative perspective, it also highlights the need for other international Courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, to assume these jurisprudential approaches to combat impunity in cases of serious violations.