Desafios da justiça internacional: a relação entre o Brasil e a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no contexto do caso da Guerrilha do Araguaia

Abstract

This paper focuses on analyzing the complex relationship between Brazil and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), using the case of the Araguaia Guerrilla as a basis. The primary goal is to investigate the legal, political, and social challenges involved in holding the Brazilian State accountable for human rights violations committed during the Military Dictatorship, especially considering the IACHR’s 2010 ruling in the Gomes Lund and Others (“Araguaia Guerrilla”) vs. Brazil case. The justification for this study lies in the importance of understanding the implications of the IACHR’s decisions in the context of Brazilian domestic law and Brazil's resistance to applying such rulings, particularly in cases involving dictatorship crimes protected by the Amnesty Law (Law No. 6.683/79). The research is based on the relevance of ensuring the effectiveness of human rights and Brazil’s democratization process. The central hypothesis is that the Brazilian State faces significant obstacles in implementing IACHR decisions due to historical, legal, and political factors, particularly because of the broad interpretation of the Amnesty Law and resistance to the Court’s jurisdiction. The study explores how these tensions affect Brazil's compliance with its international human rights obligations. Methodologically, the study adopts a qualitative approach, with document analysis of international treaties, IACHR case law, and domestic rulings from the Supreme Federal Court. The paper is orderly into chapters that address domestic and international law considering the 1988 Constitution, the constitutional order during the Military Dictatorship, the history of the Araguaia Guerrilla, the Amnesty Law, and the Inter-American Human Rights Protection System. The results show that, despite Brazil being convicted by the IACHR in the Araguaia Guerrilla case, there are still significant challenges in enforcing the Court's decisions domestically