INTRODUCTION

I.          THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

A.         PURPOSES

The Organization of American States (OAS) is an international organization created by the American States[1] to achieve an order of peace and justice, promote their solidarity, and defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity and their independence (article 1 of the OAS Charter).  The Organization of American States is a regional agency within the meaning of article 52 of the United Nations Charter.

The Ninth International Conference of American States, held in Bogotá in early 1948, approved the Charter of the Organization of American States.  The Charter was first amended by the “Protocol of Buenos Aires,” adopted at the Third Special Inter-American Conference that met in Buenos Aires in 1967.  In 1985 it was amended a second time through the “Protocol of Cartagena de Indias” signed on the occasion of the fourteenth special session of the OAS General Assembly.  Additional amendments were introduced through the Protocol of Washington (1992), which provides that one of the OAS’ essential purposes is to promote, by cooperative action, the economic, social and cultural development of the member States and to eradicate extreme poverty in the Hemisphere.  Further amendments came in 1993 with the Protocol of Managua, which established the Inter-American Council for Integral Development.  Upon ratification by two thirds of the member States, the Protocol of Managua entered into force in January 1996.

To realize the ideals upon which it rests and to fulfill its regional obligations under the United Nations Charter, the OAS has established the following as its essential purposes: a) to strengthen the peace and security of the continent; b) to promote and consolidate representative democracy, with due respect for the principle of nonintervention; c) to prevent possible causes of difficulties and to ensure the pacific settlement of disputes that may arise among the member States; d) to provide for common action on the part of those States in the event of aggression; e) to seek the solution of political, juridical, and economic problems that may arise among them; f) to promote, by cooperative action, their economic, social and cultural development; g) to eradicate extreme poverty, which constitutes an obstacle to full democratic development; and h) to achieve an effective limitation of conventional weapons that will make it possible to devote the largest amount of resources to the economic and social development of the member States (article 2 of the Charter).

In the Charter of the OAS, the American States reaffirm the following principles: international law is the standard of conduct of States in their reciprocal relations; international order consists essentially of respect for the personality, sovereignty, and independence of States, and the faithful fulfillment of their obligations; good faith shall govern the relations between States; the solidarity of the American States and the high aims which are sought through it require the political organization of those States on the basis of the effective exercise of representative democracy; war of aggression is reprehensible and victory does not give rights; every State has the right to choose, without external interference, its political, economic, and social system and to organize itself in the way best suited to it, and has the duty to abstain from intervening in the affairs of another State; the elimination of extreme poverty is an essential part of the promotion and consolidation of representative democracy and is the common and shared responsibility of the American States; an act of aggression against one American State is an act of aggression against all the American States; international controversies shall be settled by peaceful procedures; social justice is the basis of lasting peace; economic cooperation is essential to the common welfare and prosperity of the peoples of the continent; every human being, without distinction as to race, nationality, creed or sex, has fundamental rights; the spiritual unity of the hemisphere is based on respect for the cultural values of the American countries, and the education of peoples should be directed toward justice, freedom and peace (article 3 of the Charter).

The OAS Charter also contains economic and social norms, and standards on education, science and culture that the American States pledge to do their utmost to fulfill.  In particular, article 17 of the Charter provides that “Each State has the right to develop its cultural, political, and economic life freely and naturally.  In this free development, the State shall respect the rights of the individual and the principles of universal morality.”

The full protection of human rights is found in various sections of the Charters, affirming the importance that States protect them.  Accordingly, in its Preamble, the Charter indicates “the true significance of American solidarity and good neighborliness can only mean the consolidation on this continent, within the framework of democratic institutions, of a system of individual liberty and social justice based on respect for the essential rights of man.”

The Inter-American Democratic Charter, adopted by the General Assembly at its special session on September 11, 2001, reaffirms these higher values of the Organization, namely that the promotion and protection of human rights is a basic prerequisite for the existence of a democratic society, and it recognizes the importance of the continuous development and strengthening of the inter-American human rights system for the consolidation of democracy.
 

B.         ORGANS

The Organization of American States accomplishes its purposes through the following organs:

The General Assembly, the supreme organ, decides the general action and policy of the Organization.  All member States have the right to be represented in the General Assembly, where each has the right to one vote.

The Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs is convened at the request of a member State to consider problems of an urgent nature and of mutual interest.  It serves as organ of consultation to consider any threat to peace and security in the Hemisphere, in accordance with the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, signed in Rio de Janeiro in 1947.

Within the limits prescribed by the Charter and the inter-American treaties and agreements, the Permanent Council takes cognizance of any matter referred to it by the General Assembly or the Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs.  It may also act provisionally as an organ of consultation.  The Permanent Council is composed of one representative of each member State.

The purpose of the Inter-American Council for Integral Development is to promote cooperation among the American States with the objective of achieving their integral development and, in particular, contributing to the elimination of extreme poverty.

The Inter-American Juridical Committee serves the Organization as an advisory body on juridical matters and promotes the progressive development and codification of international law.

The principal function of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights is to promote the observance and protection of human rights and to serve as a consultative organ of the Organization in these matters.

The General Secretariat is the central and permanent organ of the Organization, headquartered in Washington, D.C.

The Inter-American Specialized Conferences concern themselves with special technical matters and develop specific areas of inter-American cooperation.

The Inter-American Specialized Organizations are multilateral agencies with specific functions in technical matters of common interest to the American States. The following are the Inter-American Specialized Organizations at the present time: the Inter-American Children’s Institute, the Inter-American Commission of Women, the Inter-American Indian Institute, the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, the Pan American Health Organization and the Pan American Institute of Geography and History.

II.         THE INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM FOR THE PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF
  HUMAN RIGHTS

A.         THE NINTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN STATES AND
                         HUMAN RIGHTS

Exercising their sovereign will, the American States have over the years adopted numerous international instruments that have become the building blocks of a regional system for the promotion and protection of human rights.  That system recognizes and defines those rights, establishes binding rules of conduct to promote and protect them, and creates organs to monitor their observance.

The formal beginning of this inter-American system for the promotion and protection of fundamental rights was the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, approved by the Ninth International Conference of American States (Bogotá, Colombia, 1948), which also created the Organization of American States. The OAS Charter adopted at that Ninth International Conference proclaimed the “fundamental rights of the individual” as one of the basic principles of the Organization.  A number of resolutions were approved in the area of human rights, such as those whereby separate conventions were adopted on the granting of political rights and civil rights to women[2], the resolution concerning the “Economic Status of Working Women”[3] and the “Inter-American Charter of Social Guarantees”[4] wherein the governments of the Americas assert “the fundamental principles that must protect workers of all kinds.”  This Charter of Social Guarantees “sets forth the minimum rights workers must enjoy in the American states, without prejudice to the fact that the laws of each state may extend such rights or recognize others that are more favorable,” since “the state attains its goals not only by recognizing the rights of citizens alone, but also by concerning itself with the fortunes of men and women, considered not only as citizens but also as human beings,” and as a result must guarantee “respect for political and spiritual freedoms, together with the realization of the postulates of social justice.”

B.         THE AMERICAN DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF MAN

The American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man adopted during the Ninth International Conference of American States held in May 1948 is the first international instrument of its type, as it was adopted several months prior to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The American Declaration constituted “the initial system of protection considered by the American States as being suited to the present social and juridical conditions, not without a recognition on their part that they should increasingly strengthen that system in the international field as conditions become more favorable.” Another paragraph in the introduction states that “the essential rights of man are not derived from the fact that he is a national of a certain state, but are based upon attributes of his human personality.”  The American States thus acknowledge that when the State legislates in this area, it is neither creating nor granting rights.  Instead, it is recognizing rights that existed before the State was ever created and that flow from the very nature of the human person.

Both the Inter-American Court and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have held that, although originally adopted as a declaration and not as a legally binding treaty, the American Declaration is today a source of international obligations for the OAS member States.[5]

It is also important to indicate that, in addition to its preamble, the Declaration consists of 38 articles spelling out the protected rights and the corresponding duties.  The Declaration is a catalogue of civil and political rights, as well as economic, social and cultural rights.

C.         THE CREATION OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
 AND ITS INSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION

The Fifth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs (Santiago, Chile, 1959) adopted a number of significant resolutions relative to the development and strengthening of the inter-American human rights system.  The Declaration of Santiago proclaims that “Harmony among the American republics can be effective only insofar as human rights and fundamental freedoms and the exercise of representative democracy are a reality within each one of them.” It further declares that “[t]he governments of the American states should maintain a system of freedom for the individual and of social justice based on respect for fundamental human rights.”[6]

Further, in Resolution III, the Meeting of Consultation entrusted the Inter-American Council of Jurists with “the study of the possible juridical relationship between respect for human rights and the effective exercise of representative democracy.”[7]

The most important resolution in this area to come out of the Fifth Meeting of Consultation concerned “Human Rights.”[8]  In that resolution, the Fifth Meeting of Consultation declared that given the progress made in the area of human rights in the eleven years since the proclamation of the American Declaration, and the parallel progress achieved in the United Nations and the Council of Europe, “the climate in this hemisphere is favorable to the conclusion of a convention.”  It was considered essential that “such rights be protected by a juridical system, so that men will not be driven to the extreme expedient of revolt against tyranny and oppression.”  Accordingly, in Part I of the resolution, the Inter-American Council of Jurists was instructed to “prepare … a draft Convention on Human Rights …and  … a draft convention or draft conventions on the Creation of an Inter-American Court for the Protection of Human Rights and of other organizations appropriate for the protection and observance of those rights.”

In Part II of the resolution, the Fifth Meeting of Consultation created the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, thus partly solving the problem that the American States were facing at the time: the lack of any organ specifically charged with monitoring the observance of those rights.  Part II of the resolution reads as follows:

To create an Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, composed of seven members elected, as individuals, by the Council of the Organization of American States from panels of three names presented by the governments.  The Commission, which shall be organized by the Council of the Organization and have the specific functions that the Council assigns to it, shall be charged with furthering respect for such rights.

The Council of the Organization approved the Statute of the Commission on May 25, 1960, and elected its first members on June 29 of that year.[9]

The Eighth Meeting of Consultation (Punta del Este, Uruguay, 1962) considered that "the inadequacy of the faculties and attributions conferred upon [the Commission] by its Statute" had made it difficult "for the Commission to fulfill its assigned mission," and recommended that the OAS Council revise the Statute by "broadening and strengthening the Commission's attributes and faculties to such an extent as to permit it effectively to further respect for these rights in the countries of the hemisphere."[10]

Nevertheless, the original Statute of the IACHR was in force until 1965, whereupon the Second Special Inter‑American Conference, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in November of that year, resolved to amend the Statute and broaden the Commission’s functions and authorities.[11]  In particular, the member States resolved the following:

To authorize the Commission to examine communications submitted to it and any other available information, to address to the government of any American State a request for information deemed pertinent by the Commission, and to make recommendations, when it deems this appropriate, with the objective of bringing about more effective observance of fundamental human rights.

To request the Commission to submit a report annually to the Inter‑American Conference or Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs.  This report should include a statement of progress achieved in realization of the goals set forth in the American Declaration, a statement of areas in which further steps are needed to give effect to the human rights set forth in the American Declaration, and such observations as the Commission may deem appropriate on matters covered in the communications submitted to it and in other information available to the Commission.

At its session held in April 1966, the Commission amended its Statute to conform to the resolution of the Second Special Inter‑American Conference.  The most important amendment was that the Commission now had the possibility of examining individual petitions and making specific recommendations to the member States relative to those petitions.[12]

The IACHR became a principal organ of the OAS with the amendment of then article 51 of the Charter of the Organization, under the 1967 Protocol of Buenos Aires.

The amended Charter, which entered into force in 1970, also refers to the Commission in what were then articles 112 and 150.  In the first of these, reference is made to an Inter-American Commission on Human Rights whose principal function shall be to “promote the observance and protection of human rights and to serve as a consultative organ of the Organization in these matters.” Article 150 of the amended Charter, for its part, provided that the Commission was to “keep vigilance over the observance of human rights” until such time as the American Convention on Human Rights entered into force.

D.         THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

The precursors of the American Convention on Human Rights date back to the Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace, held in Mexico in 1945, which instructed the Inter-American Juridical Committee to draft a declaration. That idea was taken up again at the Fifth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, in Santiago, Chile, in 1959, which decided to press for preparation of a human rights convention.

The original draft of the Convention prepared by the Inter-American Council of Jurists was presented to the OAS Council to elicit comments from the States and from the Inter-American Commission.  In 1967, the Commission submitted another draft of the Convention.  To analyze the various drafts, the OAS convened an Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, which met in San Jose, Costa Rica, November 7 through 22, 1969.  On November 21, the Conference adopted the American Convention on Human Rights.

The Convention, which entered into force on July 18, 1978, strengthened the system by making the Commission more effective and creating a Court, as well as by changing the legal nature of the instruments upon which the system's institutional structure is based.

According to the first paragraph of its preamble, the purpose of the Convention is “to consolidate in this hemisphere, within the framework of democratic institutions, a system of personal liberty and social justice based on respect for the essential rights of man.”  Part I of the Convention establishes the State’s obligations to respect the rights and freedoms recognized therein, and its duty to adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to give effect to those rights or freedoms.  The Convention goes on to spell out the rights and freedoms it protects, focusing mainly on civil and political rights.  In the case of economic, social and cultural rights, the States pledge only to “adopt measures, both internally and through international cooperation, especially those of an economic and technical nature, with a view to achieving progressively, by legislation or other appropriate means, the full realization of the rights implicit in the economic, social, educational, scientific, and cultural standards set forth in the Charter of the Organization of American States” (article 26).

Part II of the Convention establishes the means of protection, namely the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.  These are the organs that have “competence with respect to matters relating to the fulfillment of the commitments made by the States Parties to [the] Convention.” The functions and powers of the Commission are spelled out in articles 41 to 43 of the Convention.  Articles 44 to 51 set forth the procedure for individual communications.  The structure and organization of the Inter-American Court is provided for in article 52.

E.         THE PROTOCOLS TO THE AMERICAN CONVENTION

Article 77 of the Convention permits the adoption of protocols with a view to gradually including other rights and freedoms within its system of protection. At its eighteenth regular session (1988), the General Assembly opened for signature the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Protocol of San Salvador). The protocol was adopted on November 16, 1999. It was based on a working draft prepared by the Commission. In its Preamble, the States Parties to the American Convention recognize the close relationship that exists between the two sets of rights “in that the different categories of rights constitute an indivisible whole based on the recognition of the dignity of the human person, for which reason both require permanent protection and promotion...” The States Parties also recall that “the ideal of free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights.”

In ratifying the Protocol, the States Parties “undertake to adopt the necessary measures … to the extent allowed by their available resources, and taking into account their degree of development, for the purpose of achieving progressively and pursuant to their internal legislation, the full observance of the rights recognized in (the) Protocol.”  The latter deals with the rights and conditions of work, trade union rights, rights to social security, health, a healthy environment, food, education, the benefits of culture, family and children’s rights and those of the elderly and the handicapped.

Article 19 of the Protocol establish the means of protection, including the possibility of individual petition for alleged violations of articles 8(a) and 13 on trade union rights and the right to education.  

The Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty was approved by the OAS General Assembly at its twentieth regular session (Asuncion, Paraguay, 1990).  In 1969, when the American Convention on Human Rights was being drafted, a concerted effort to include a provision that would have unconditionally proscribed capital punishment was unsuccessful.  With ratification by the States Parties, this Protocol would abolish the death penalty the length and breadth of the hemisphere.  The Protocol entered into force on August 28, 1991. 

F.        THE NEW STATUTE AND NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

At its ninth regular session (La Paz, Bolivia, 1979), the General Assembly of the OAS approved the current Statute of the Commission.  Article 1 of the Statute, crafted along the lines of what was then article 106 of the OAS Charter, defines the Commission as “an organ of the Organization of American States, created to promote the observance and defense of human rights and to serve as consultative organ of the Organization in this matter.”

The major innovations that the American Convention introduced where the Commission is concerned are reflected in the current Statute.  Whereas under the original Statute, Commission members represented all the member States of the Organization, under the new Statute it is the Commission itself that represents the OAS’ full membership.  The institutional status of its members now matches the status to which the Commission itself was elevated (article 53 of the amended Charter).  The seven members of the Commission are elected by the General Assembly to a four-year term (article 3), while under the original Statute they were elected by the Council of the Organization.  It should be noted, however, that under article 11 of the current Statute, it is the OAS Permanent Council that fills any vacancies that might occur on the Commission.  As for the Commission’s internal structure under the new Statute, the Commission has a President, a First Vice-President and a Second Vice-President, each with a one-year term and eligible for re-election only once every four years.

The Statute now in force makes a clear distinction between the Inter-American Commission’s competence vis-à-vis States parties to the American Convention on Human Rights and its competence vis-à-vis member States of the Organization that are not party to the Convention.  The Commission’s competence with respect to the latter flows from the provisions of the OAS Charter and from the Commission’s past practice.  The Commission’s competence with respect to the States Parties to the Convention follows from that instrument. The powers that the Statute has given to the Commission with respect to member States of the Organization that are not parties to the American Convention are the same as those that the Commission had under the original Statute.  Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the Statute spell out the Commission’s functions and powers.

At its 109^th special session, held in December 2000, the Commission approved new Rules of Procedure, which took effect on May 1, 2001.

Title I of the Rules has five chapters, containing provisions on the nature and composition of the Commission, its membership, its officers, the Executive Secretariat and the functioning of the Commission.

Title II sets forth the procedure that, under the Commission’s Statute, applies to the States parties to the American Convention on Human Rights and the procedure that applies in the case of member States that are not parties to that instrument.  It also contains provisions relating to the on-site investigations the Commission conducts, the Annual Report and general and special reports it prepares, and the hearings it holds.

Title III of the Commission’s Rules concerns its relations with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.  Chapter I contains provisions relating to delegates, advisors, witnesses and experts, while Chapter II sets out the procedure to be followed when the Commission decides to bring a case to the Court under article 61 of the American Convention.

Finally, Title IV contains the final provisions of the Rules, which concern their interpretation, amendment and entry into force.
 

G.         THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

The idea of a court to protect human rights in the Americas has a long history.  In Resolution XXXI, titled “Inter-American Court to Protect the Rights of Man,” the Ninth International Conference of American States (Bogotá, Colombia, 1948) considered that the protection of these rights “should be guaranteed by a juridical organ, inasmuch as no right is genuinely assured unless it is safeguarded by a competent court.”  Thereafter, in the first part of the resolution titled “Human Rights,” the Fifth Meeting of Consultation (1959) instructed the Inter-American Council of Jurists to prepare a draft on the creation of an “Inter-American Court of Human Rights” and other organs appropriate for the protection and observance of human rights.  It therefore recommended that the Inter-American Juridical Committee prepare a draft statute providing for the creation of an inter-American court to guarantee the rights of man. [13]

Finally, the American Convention on Human Rights was adopted and with the adoption of the Convention, an Inter-American Court of Human Rights was created (Chapter VII of Part II).

The regular session of the OAS General Assembly that convened in La Paz, Bolivia in 1979 approved the Statute of the Court (resolution AG/RES. 448).  Article 1 defines the Court as “an autonomous judicial institution whose purpose is the application and interpretation of the American Convention on Human Rights.”

The Court has adjudicatory and advisory jurisdiction.  In the case of the adjudicatory jurisdiction, only the Commission and the States parties to the American Convention that have recognized the Court’s binding jurisdiction are authorized to present a case seeking the interpretation or application of the Convention, and then only after exhausting the appropriate procedures prescribed in articles 48 to 50 thereof concerning the processing of cases before the Commission.  In other words, the Court has jurisdiction only when the State party against which a case is brought has accepted the Court’s binding jurisdiction.  The declaration whereby the State recognizes the Court’s binding jurisdiction may be made unconditionally, or on condition of reciprocity, for a specified period or for specific cases.

In the case of the Court’s advisory jurisdiction, article 64 of the Convention provides that any member State of the Organization may consult the Court on the interpretation of the Convention or of other treaties on the protection of human rights in the American States. This right of consultation extends to the organs listed in Chapter X of the OAS Charter, within the area of respective competence of each.  At the request of any member State, the Court may also issue an opinion on the compatibility of any of the said State’s domestic laws with the aforementioned international instruments.

At the seventh special session of the OAS General Assembly (May 1979), the States parties to the Convention elected the first seven judges to sit on the Court.  On September 3, 1979, the latter was officially installed in San Jose, Costa Rica, the headquarters of the Court. At its third session, July 30 to August 9, 1980, the Court finalized the work on the Headquarters Agreement concluded with Costa Rica, setting forth the privileges and immunities of the Court, its judges and its staff, and those persons who appear before it. The Government of Costa Rica ratified that agreement.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights approved its first Rules of Procedure in July 1980.  They were patterned after the Rules of Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights in effect at that time, which were themselves modeled along the lines of the Rules of Procedure of the International Court of Justice (ICJ).  Faced with the need to streamline those procedures, the Court approved its second set of Rules of Procedure in 1991, which took effect on August 1 of that year.  Five years later, on September 16, 1996, the Court adopted a third set of Rules, which took effect on January 1, 1997.  The principal qualitative change that the third version of the Rules of Procedure introduced relates to article 23, which provides that representatives of the victims or their next of kin may independently submit their own arguments and evidence during the reparations stage. Finally, on November 24, 2000, the Court introduced new Rules of Procedure which will take effect on June 1, 2001.  With the most recent amendment of its Rules of Procedure, the Court introduced a series of provisions to grant the alleged victims, their next of kin or their duly accredited representatives direct participation (locus standi in judicio) in all stages of the Court’s proceedings once an application has been presented.

H.        MORE RECENT INTER-AMERICAN INSTRUMENTS CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS

At its 1985 regular session, where the General Assembly approved the Protocol of Cartagena de Indias amending the OAS Charter, the member States opened for signature the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.

This Convention contains a detailed definition of torture and specifies who will be held guilty of the crime of torture.  The States parties not only undertake to severely punish perpetrators of this crime but also to take measures to prevent and punish any other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction.  Accordingly, under the terms of this Convention, no person charged with torture will be able to elude justice by fleeing to the territory of another State party.  This Convention entered into force on February 28, 1987, thirty days after deposit of the second instrument of ratification.

During its twenty-fourth regular session, held in Belém do Pará, Brazil, the OAS General Assembly approved the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, which entered into force on March 28, 1996, thirty days after the second instrument of ratification was deposited.

This instrument contains a detailed definition of forced disappearance and of who shall be held guilty of this crime.  The States Parties undertake not to practice, permit or tolerate the forced disappearance of persons and pledge to punish those persons within their jurisdictions who commit or attempt to commit the crime of forced disappearance of persons, as well as their accomplices and accessories.  They further pledge to take any legislative measures necessary to criminalize forced disappearance and to cooperate with one another to prevent, punish, and eliminate the forced disappearance of persons, taking the measures necessary to comply with the commitments undertaken in the Convention.  The Convention makes forced disappearance an extraditable offense.  Thus, no one charged with the crime will be able to escape punishment by fleeing to the territory of another State Party.

Another instrument approved on the occasion of the twenty-fourth regular session of the OAS General Assembly held in Belém do Pará, Brazil, was the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women, Convention of Belém do Pará.  The latter entered into force on March 5, 1995, thirty days after the second instrument of ratification was deposited.

This instrument establishes a detailed definition of violence against women, which includes physical, sexual and psychological harm or suffering.  It provides that every woman has the right to be free from violence and to enjoy all human rights and freedoms embodied in regional and international human rights instruments. The States Parties condemn all forms of violence against women and agree to investigate, prosecute and punish such violence with due diligence, and to pursue policies and specific measures to prevent and eradicate it.

            Finally, the OAS General Assembly adopted the Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities at its twenty-ninth regular session, held in Guatemala City. This Convention entered into force on September 14, 2001, thirty days after deposit of the sixth instrument of ratification

The objectives of the Convention are to prevent and eliminate all forms of discrimination against persons with disabilities and to promote their full integration into society.  To follow up on the commitments undertaken in the Convention, a Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities is to be established, composed of one representative appointed by each State party.