A Racionalidade jurídica da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no caso Gomes Lund e outros VS Brasil


Even after thirty years of continuous struggles to consolidate Brazilian democracy, the subject of transitional justice still remains alit in our legal debate. Currently we face a juridical insecurity regarding the validity of the Brazilian amnesty law, since the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) and the Interamerican Court of Human Rights (ICourtHR), when analyzing this subject, have reached completely opposite decisions. In order to contribute with this debate this paper aims to answer the following questions: When rendering a decision in the Gomes Lund and others vs Brazil Case, which were the main subjects covered by the ICourtHR that led to the conclusion of invalidity of the Brazilian amnesty law? How did they structure their arguments? Which were the sources of precedents and legislation used by the Court? To sum up, which was the legal reasoning of the Court when judging this case? In order to answer those questions the research, using an inductive method, chose the main subjects stated by the decision and problematized the Brazilian liability in the Interamerican Human Rights System.

Trabalho apresentado no XXIV Congresso do CONPEDI sob o tema 'Direito e Política: da Vulnerabilidade à Sustentabilidade' ocorreu entre os dias 11 e 14 e novembro de 2015, na cidade de Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais.
Área do Conhecimento