THE RAMA AND KRIOL PEOPLES AND OTHERS VS. NICARAGUA AND THE TRANSVERSAL ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 26 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION

Abstract

This article analyzes the judgment in the case of the Rama and Kriol Peoples, the
Black Creole Indigenous Community of Bluefields and Others v. Nicaragua, in which
the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) declared the Nicaraguan State
internationally responsible for violating political, social, cultural, and environmental
rights related to the recognition and enjoyment of collective property rights by
several indigenous, tribal, and Afro-descendant communities, in the context of
the State’s promotion of a large-scale infrastructure project. In this judgment,
the IACHR, for the first time, expressly recognized the right of indigenous and
tribal peoples to self-determination —self-government or community autonomy—.
Based on the concurring opinion of two IACHR judges on the judgment, the article
analyzes, in a cross-cutting manner, various rights protected by Article 26 of the
American Convention on Human Rights, highlighting that, in relation to the same
circumstances, different, closely related conventional rights are affected. Thus,
emphasizing the characteristics of indivisibility and interdependence of human rights,
which are directly related, among others, to the right to prior, free and informed
consultation, required in the case of large-scale projects; the rights claimed in this
case are protected by articles 13, 21, 23 and 26 in relation to the general obligations
of respect and guarantee (arts. 1.1 and 2) of the American Convention.