Duty to Ensure Human Rights and its Evolution in the Inter-American System: Comparing Maria de Pengha v. Brazil with Jessica Lenagan (Gonzales) v. United States
![handle is hein.journals/ajgsp21 and id is 457 raw text is: THE DUTY TO ENSURE HUMAN
RIGHTS AND ITS EVOLUTION IN THE
INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM:
COMPARING M4RIA DA PENHA V
BRAZIL WITH JESSICA LENAHAN
(GONZALES) V. UNITED STATES
PATRICIA TARRE MOSER*
Introduction..........................................437
I. The Two Cases..................... ..................439
II. Procedural Obligations.................................442
III. Theory of Foreseeable Risk.............................444
IV. The Consequences of This Evolution................448
Conclusion ..................................... ......452
INTRODUCTION
The possibility of holding a State responsible for acts of domestic
violence has been recognized in the Inter-American system since the first
decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Veldsquez-
Rodriguez v. Honduras.' Veldsquez-Rodriguez, as with most cases in the
Inter-American system, concerned actions perpetrated by State agents.
Nonetheless, since Veldsquez-Rodriguez, the court has consistently held
that States may be held responsible for acts perpetrated by private
individuals when the State does not comply with its duty to ensure human
rights.2 Regarding this duty, the court held that [s]tates must prevent,
. Patricia Tarre Moser earned her law degree from the Universidad Central de
Venezuela and an LL.M in international human rights law from the University of Notre
Dame. Ms. Tarre Moser is a lawyer at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
The opinions expressed on this article do not reflect the opinions of the Inter-American
Court of Human Rights or its registry. The author would like to thank Rose Rivera for
her valuable comments.
1. Merits, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 4, 194 (Jul. 29, 1988).
2. Id. T 164; see also, e.g., Perozo v. Venezuela, Preliminary Objections, Merits,
Reparations, and Costs, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 195, T 298 (Jan. 28, 2009);
Ximenes Lopes v. Brazil, Merits, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 149, 125 (Jul. 4,
2006); Pueblo Bello Massacer v. Colombia, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 140, 1 113
437](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/ajgsp21&div=20&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most