Advisory opinion 24/17 and its binding character in Ecuador

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35381/racji.v8i1.2763

Keywords:

Constitution, human rights, court of justice, (UNESCO Thesaurus)

Abstract

The general objective of the research was to legally analyze the advisory opinion 24/17 and its binding nature in Ecuador. The method developed by the researchers was supported from the qualitative perspective, we proceeded with the legal analysis of the investigated topic, the background content of the documentary and bibliographic analysis was examined, the use of methods of theoretical level and empirical level of knowledge was conceived, such as: Analytical-synthetic, inductive-deductive, the information was selected through the interview. It is concluded that the advisory opinion 24/17 is not binding and does not generate legal effects in Ecuador, all this due to the fact that by principle of reserved domain the States are in charge of their internal legal system and this is recognized by the same Convention in Art. 17.2 regarding marriage. It has been determined that the IACHR Court, through an ultra vires exercise, pretends to attribute competences to itself.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arias, F., y Galindo, J. (2013). El sistema interamericano de derechos. Protección Multinivel de Derechos Humanos Manual–dhes. [The Inter-American system of rights. Multilevel Protection of Human Rights Manual-dhes]. Red de Derechos Humanos y Educación Superior, 113-163. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/gskoh

Asamblea Nacional Constituyente de la República del Ecuador, (2008). Constitución de la República del Ecuador. [Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador]. Montecristi. Registro Oficial 449 de 20-oct-2008. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/sia

Congreso Nacional. (2005). Código Civil. [ Civil Code ]. Registro Oficial Suplemento 46 de 24-jun.-2005 Última reforma: 08-jul.-2019. Recuperado de: https://n9.cl/qks2i

Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. (2019). Sentencia: No. 11-18-CN/19. [Ruling: Nº. 11-18-CN/19]. Caso Nro. 11-18-CN del 12 de junio del 2019 sobre el Matrimonio igualitario. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/umf7i

Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. (2017). Opinión Consultiva OC-24/17.Identidad de género, y no discriminación a parejas del mismo sexo. [Advisory Opinion OC-24/17. Gender identity and non-discrimination against same-sex couples]. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/8n3pv

Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. (2018). ABC de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, preguntas frecuentes. [ABC of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, frequently asked questions]. San José. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/8jesj

Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. (2021). Opinión Consultiva OC-28/21 del 07 de junio de 2021. Reelección presidencial indefinida va en contra de la convención y declaración americana. [Advisory Opinion OC-28/21 of June 7, 2021. Indefinite presidential reelection goes against the American convention and declaration]. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/bsuae

De Derechos Humanos, C. I. (2017). Opinión consultiva OC-22/16 de 26 de febrero de 2016 solicitada por la República de Panamá. [Advisory Opinion OC-22/16 of February 26, 2016 requested by the Republic of Panama]. Cuaderno Jurídico y Político, 2(7), 90–109. https://doi.org/10.5377/cuadernojurypol.v2i7.11041

Ecuador Asamblea Nacional Constituyente. (2016). Ley Orgánica de Gestión de la Identidad y datos Civiles. [Organic Law on Identity and Civil Data Management]. Quito: Registro Oficial de 4 de febrero. Recuperado de https://n9.cl/brsl6

Vítolo, A. M. (2020). El valor de las opiniones consultivas de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos a la luz de las OC-21/14 y 23/17. [The value of the advisory opinions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in light of OC-21/14 and 23/17]. Revista Jurídica Austral, 1(1), 187-217. https://doi.org/10.26422/RJA.2020.0101.vit

Published

2023-05-01

How to Cite

López-Quinteros , E. F., Cornejo-Aguiar , J. S., Vega-Falcón , V., & Merino-Sánchez, W. Y. (2023). Advisory opinion 24/17 and its binding character in Ecuador. IUSTITIA SOCIALIS, 8(1), 571–582. https://doi.org/10.35381/racji.v8i1.2763

Issue

Section

De Investigación

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > >>