The Practice and Procedure of the Inter

American Court of Human Rights 2nd

Edition Jo M. Pasqualucci
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-practice-and-procedure-of-the-inter-american-cou
rt-of-human-rights-2nd-edition-jo-m-pasqualucci/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

When human rights clash at the European Court of Human

Rights: conflict or harmony? 1st Edition Stijn Smet

https://textbookfull.com/product/when-human-rights-clash-at-the-
european-court-of-human-rights-conflict-or-harmony-1st-edition-
stijn-smet/

The American Convention on Human Rights : essential

rights 1st Edition Antkowiak

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-american-convention-on-
human-rights-essential-rights-1st-edition-antkowiak/

The American Convention On Human Right Crucial Rights

And Their Theory And Practice Cecilia Medina Quiroga

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-american-convention-on-
human-right-crucial-rights-and-their-theory-and-practice-cecilia-
medina-quiroga/

The Theory Potential and Practice of Procedural

Dialogue in the European Convention on Human Rights
System 77 Human Rights Research Series First Edition R
Glas Lize
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-theory-potential-and-
practice-of-procedural-dialogue-in-the-european-convention-on-
human-rights-system-77-human-rights-research-series-first-
Constitutional Landmarks: Supreme Court Decisions on
Separation of Powers, Federalism, and Economic Rights
Charles M. Lamb

https://textbookfull.com/product/constitutional-landmarks-
supreme-court-decisions-on-separation-of-powers-federalism-and-
economic-rights-charles-m-lamb/

Human Rights On Trial A Genealogy Of The Critique Of

Human Rights Justine Lacroix Jean Yves Pranchère

https://textbookfull.com/product/human-rights-on-trial-a-
genealogy-of-the-critique-of-human-rights-justine-lacroix-jean-
yves-pranchere/

Human Rights in China A Social Practice in the Shadows

of Authoritarianism 1st Edition Eva Pils

https://textbookfull.com/product/human-rights-in-china-a-social-
practice-in-the-shadows-of-authoritarianism-1st-edition-eva-pils/

Visual Imagery and Human Rights Practice Sandra

Ristovska

https://textbookfull.com/product/visual-imagery-and-human-rights-
practice-sandra-ristovska/

Asia and the Drafting of the Universal Declaration of

Human Rights Robin Ramcharan

https://textbookfull.com/product/asia-and-the-drafting-of-the-
universal-declaration-of-human-rights-robin-ramcharan/
 the practice and procedure of the inter-american court
of human rights
Second Edition

In this thoroughly revised second edition that incorporates the major changes made in
the procedures and practice of the Inter-American Court since the original publication of
this book, Jo M. Pasqualucci provides a comprehensive critique that is at once scholarly
yet practical. She analyzes all aspects of the Court’s advisory jurisdiction, contentious
jurisdiction, and provisional measures orders through June 2012. She compares the
practice and procedure of the Inter-American Court with that of the European Court of
Human Rights, the International Court of Justice, and the United Nations Human Rights
Committee. She discusses changes in the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court
that entered into force on January 1, 2010, and that substantially change the role of the
Inter-American Commission in contentious cases before the Court. She also evaluates
the challenges and means of State compliance with the Court’s innovative reparations
orders and describes several instances of State compliance and noncompliance.
Featuring revisions to every chapter to address the numerous new judgments, provi-
sional measures, and orders adopted by the Court, this book will provide an important
and updated resource for scholars, practitioners, and students of international human
rights law.

Jo M. Pasqualucci is Professor of Law at the University of South Dakota. She earned an

SJD in International and Comparative Law from George Washington University Law
School and was affiliated with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as a Fulbright
scholar in Costa Rica. She lived in Central America for several years. Pasqualucci’s
articles on the Inter-American Court have been published in journals such as the Stanford
Journal of International Law, Michigan Journal of International Law, Virginia Journal
of International Law, Wisconsin International Law Journal, and the Human Rights Law
Review.
 The Practice and Procedure of the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
second edition

JO M. PASQUALUCCI
cambridge university press
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town,
Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Mexico City
Cambridge University Press
32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, ny 10013-2473, usa
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107006584


C Jo M. Pasqualucci 2003, 2013

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception

and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2003

Second edition published 2013

Printed in the United States of America

A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Pasqualucci, Jo M.
The practice and procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights / Jo
M. Pasqualucci, University of South Dakota, School of Law. – Second Edition.
pages cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
isbn 978-1-107-00658-4 (hardback)
1. Inter-American Court of Human Rights – Rules and practice. 2. International courts – Rules and
practice. 3. Human rights – America. I. Title.
kdz579.i58p37 2013
347.27 05–dc23 2012014235

isbn 978-1-107-00658-4 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urls for external or
third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on
such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
 To my father,
Lorenzo Pasqualucci,
who sparked and nurtured my love of learning
 Contents

Foreword by Thomas Buergenthal page xv

Preface to the Second Edition xvii
Preface xxi
Acknowledgments xxv
Table of Cases xxvii
Table of Articles of the American Convention on Human Rights xliii
Table of Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court
of Human Rights xlv
Table of Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission
on Human Rights xlvii
Table of Other Legal Instruments and Documents xlix

1 Introduction 1
The Inter-American Human Rights System 2
A Concise History of the Inter-American Court 6
Composition of the Court 8
Overview of Jurisdiction 10
The Court’s Interpretation of the American Convention 12
An Illustrative Contentious Case 14
Facts 14
Procedures before the Commission 15
Jurisdiction of the Court 15
Initial Procedures before the Court 15
Provisional Measures 16
Partial Acceptance of International Responsibility 16

vii
viii Contents

Proceedings on the Merits 16

Decision on the Merits 16
Reparations 17
State Compliance 17
Past Procedural Advances Made by the Court and the Commission 17
More Recent Procedural Changes 19
Limitations Influencing the Effectiveness of the Inter-American
System 24
Inadequate Funding of the Court and the Commission 24
Lack of Universality 26
Domestic Implementation 27
Failure of the Political Organs to Exert Political Pressure
on States 28
Quality Control of Judges Elected to the Court 30
Continuting Proposals to Alter the Inter-American System 32
Conclusion 34

part i the advisory jurisdiction of the

inter-american court

2 Advisory Practice and Procedure 37

Character and Scope of the Inter-American Court’s Advisory
Jurisdiction 38
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae (Standing) 40
Standing of Member States 41
Standing of OAS Organs 42
Jurisdiction Ratione Materiae (Subject Matter Jurisdiction) 46
Jurisdiction to Issue Advisory Opinions Interpreting the
American Convention 47
Interpretation of the Substantive Provisions of the American
Convention 48
Interpretation of the Procedural Provisions of the American
Convention 52
Jurisdiction to Issue Advisory Opinions Interpreting Other
Treaties 54
Other Inter-American Treaties 56
Nonregional Treaties 57
Jurisdiction to Issue Advisory Opinions on the Compatibility of
Domestic Laws of a Member State 57
Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis Following the Attempted
Withdrawal of a Request for an Advisory Opinion 59
 Contents ix

Advisory Jurisdiction Subject to the Court’s Discretion 59

Discretion to Exercise Advisory Jurisdiction over a Case in
Dispute between Two States or between a State and an
International Organization 62
Discretion to Exercise Advisory Jurisdiction over a Dispute that is
before Another International Body 65
Court Procedures Applicable to an Advisory Opinion Request 66
Requirements of the Request 68
Admissibility 69
Notification of the Submission 70
Written Proceedings 71
Amicus Briefs 71
Preliminary Objections to an Advisory Request 73
Oral Proceedings 74
Content, Delivery, and Publication of Advisory Opinions 76
Domestic and Institutional Implementation of the Court’s Advisory
Opinions 77
Conclusion 80

part ii the contentious jurisdiction of the

inter-american court of human rights

3 Proceedings before the Inter-American Commission 83

Initial Processing of Petitions 85
Technical Informational Requirements 87
Six-Month Rule 88
Petition Not Substantially the Same as One Previously Studied or
Pending before Another International Body 89
Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies 92
Domestic Remedies Must Be Available, Adequate, Appropriate,
and Effective 94
Exceptions to the Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies 97
Decision on Admissibility 98
Fact-Finding before the Commission 101
Hearings before the Commission Are Not Required 101
On-Site Investigations in the State Are Not Required 103
Presumption of the Truth of the Allegations in the Petition 105
Friendly Settlement 106
Withdrawal and Archiving of Petitions and Cases 109
Reporting Requirements 110
The Commission’s Decision to Submit a Case to the Court 111
Deadline for Submission of a Case to the Court 112
x Contents

Extension of the Time Period for Submission of a Case 114

Interstate Cases 116

4 Jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court 117

Compétence de la compétence 117
Scope of the Jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court 119
Manner in which a State May Accept the Jurisdiction of the
Inter-American Court 120
Jurisdiction Ratione Materiae 122
The “Fourth Instance Formula” 125
Manifestly Groundless Petitions 128
State Reservations Modifying the Ratione Materiae of the
Convention 128
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae 130
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae: Passive Legitimation 130
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae: Active Legitimation 131
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae: Standing to File a Complaint with
the Commission 131
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae to Consider Petitions Filed by Any
Person or Group of Persons 132
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae to Consider Concrete Cases 133
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae to Consider Cases in which the
Victim Is an Individual or Shareholder in a Business
Entity 135
Jurisdiction Ratione Personae to Consider State-Filed Complaints 136
Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis 137
Lack of Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis If the Violation Took Place
before the State Accepted the Jurisdiction of the Court 138
Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis over Continuing Violations 138
Forced Disappearance as a Continuing Violation 139
The Failure to Investigate, Prosecute, and Punish May
Constitute a Continuing Violation 139
Violation of Property Rights May be a Continuing Violation 141
Continuing Violations of Other Treaties 141
State Acceptance of Jurisdiction with a Temporal Condition 142
Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis over States that Denounce the
Convention 143
Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis over States that Attempt to
Withdraw Acceptance of the Jurisdiction of the
Court 145
Jurisdiction Ratione Loci 146
 Contents xi

Jurisdiction Ratione Loci Not Limited to a State’s Physical

Territory 147
Limitation of Jurisdiction Ratione Loci Must Be Expressly
Permitted by Treaty 148

5 Proceedings on the Merits: Fact-Finding and Attribution

of State Responsibility 150
The Scope of the Court’s Fact-Finding Powers 151
Submission of Evidence 152
The Court’s Authority to Admit Evidence on Its Own Motion 153
Expert Witnesses 154
Declarants 156
Amicus Curiae 158
Oral Proceedings 159
Structure of Hearings 161
Testimonial Evidence 163
Objections to Witnesses and Alleged Victims 164
Documentary Evidence 165
Demonstrative Evidence 168
Presumptions and Circumstantial Evidence 168
Circumstantial Evidence 168
Presumptions 169
Burden of Proof 171
Standard of Proof 173
Judicial Notice 174
Written Closing Arguments 175
Discontinuance, Acquiescence, and Friendly Settlement 175
Deliberations and Judgment 178
Interpretation of Judgment 179
Revision of Judgment on the Basis of Newly Discovered Facts or
Fraudulent Evidence 181
Attribution of State Responsibility 182
Failure to Investigate and Punish Violations by Persons Not Acting
on Behalf of the State 184

6 Victim Reparations 188

Scope of the Inter-American Court’s Authority to Order Reparations 189
The Goal of Full Restitution (restitutio in integrum) 190
The Injured Party 193
Types of Reparations Ordered by the Inter-American Court 196
Restitution 196
xii Contents

Restoration of Liberty to Persons Who Were Illegally Detained 197

The Return of Illegally Seized Property 197
Protection for Displaced Victims to Return to Their Homes 198
Reinstatement of Employment 198
Expungement of Public Records 199
Return, Demarcation, and Award of Title to the Ancestral Lands of
Indigenous Communities 201
Miscellaneous Measures of Restitution to Restore the Status
Quo Ante 201
Rehabilitation 202
Satisfaction 204
Public Act to Acknowledge Responsibility 204
State Apology 205
Publication or Dissemination of the Judgment of the
Inter-American Court 205
Measures to Commemorate the Victims or the Events 206
Locating and Identifying the Victims 207
Educational Expenses and Training 208
Refrain from Execution 208
Community-Based Reparations 209
Miscellaneous Measures of Satisfaction 212
Guarantees of Nonrepetition 212
Capacity Building 212
Legislative Reform 214
Amend, Annul, or Repeal Incompatible Domestic Laws 214
Declaration that Domestic Law Lacks Legal Effect 217
Authority to Rule after the State Accepts International
Responsibility 219
No Ruling If the Domestic Law Is No Longer in Effect 220
Court Order to Annul or Execute a Domestic Judgment or Ruling 220
Adopting Other Measures to Guarantee the Nonrepetition of
Violations 222
Obligation to Investigate, Prosecute, and Punish 223
Investigation 224
Prosecution and Punishment 226
Judgment per se a Form of Reparations 228
Compensation 229
Pecuniary Damages 229
Loss of Earnings and Benefits 230
Beneficiaries of Lost Earnings of Deceased Victims 233
Consequential Damages 234
 Contents xiii

Nonpecuniary Damages 235

Determination of Amount of Nonpecuniary Damages 238
Beneficiaries of Deceased or Disappeared Victim’s
Nonpecuniary Damages 239
Costs and Expenses 240
Attorneys Fees 241
Costs and Expenses Based in Equity 243
Terms of Payment 243
Legal Assistance Fund 244
No Reparations for Injury to the Victim’s Life Plan 245
Reparations Agreements between States and Victims 246
Method of Compliance 247

7 Provisional Measures 251

Statutory Authority 253
Statutory Requirements 257
Extreme Gravity 257
Urgency 258
Irreparable Damage 259
Irreparable Damage to Persons 263
Prima Facie Situation 265
Inherent Authority to Order Provisional Measures 267
Precautionary Measures Ordered by the Commission 268
Entities Authorized to Request Provisional Measures 269
Temporal Jurisdiction to Order Provisional Measures 270
Expedited Procedures 272
The President’s Adoption of Urgent Measures When the Court Is
Not in Session 272
Plenary Court’s Consideration of Provisional Measures Requests 273
Discretion to Order Provisional Measures 274
Court Orders 275
Beneficiaries of Provisional Measures 276
Witnesses before Domestic and Inter-American Authorities 276
Human Rights Advocates and Organizations 278
Persons Deprived of Their Freedom 279
Persons on Death Row 280
Persons Dislocated during Internal Armed Conflicts 281
Indigenous Communities 282
Means of Protection 283
Maintenance of Provisional Measures 285
Lifting (Terminating) Provisional Measures 287
xiv Contents

Binding Nature of Provisional Measures 291

Monitoring Provisional Measures 293
Domestic Implementation of Provisional Measures 294
Conclusion 297

8 State Compliance with Court-Ordered Reparations 299

Conventionality Control 300
Monitoring State Compliance with Judgments 303
State Acceptance of International Responsibility 306
Voluntary Apology and Dissemination of the Truth 307
Anticipatory Remedial State Action 308
Implementation of Inter-American Court Orders to Pay
Compensatory Damages 309
Prior Payment Authorized by States 310
Implementation of Measures of Restitution 311
Implementation of Measures of Rehabilitation 314
Implementation of Measures of Satisfaction 315
Implementation of Measures of Nonrepetition 320
Capacitation Programs 320
Legislative Reform 321
Annul or Execute Domestic Court Rulings 325
Implementation of Orders to Investigate, Prosecute, and Punish 325
Alternative Forms of Reparations 328
Efforts to Improve Compliance with Court Orders 330
Conclusion 334

Appendix 1: American Convention on Human Rights 335

Appendix 2: Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights 361
Bibliography 389
Index 401
 Foreword

In 1978, when the American Convention on Human Rights entered into force, much
of Central America and South America was ruled by dictatorships of either the right
or the left. Of the eleven States whose ratifications had brought the Convention
into force, fewer than one-half had democratically elected governments at the time.
The remainder ratified for a variety of political reasons, including the pressure
brought to bear by the Carter administration and the fact that some of these States
were convinced that ratification posed no serious risks to them because the system
established by the Convention would never be implemented. Effective human rights
institutions were not something many governments in the region believed in at the
time, but they were not opposed to a little window dressing for propaganda purposes.
The attitude of these regimes toward human rights was graphically demonstrated
when, shortly after the Convention entered into force, the General Assembly of
the Organization of American States (OAS) failed to adopt a budget for the newly
created Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Had it not been for funds provided
by Costa Rica, the Court would have been paralyzed even before it began to perform
its functions.
Over the years, however, the political climate in the Americas changed gradu-
ally, making it possible for the Inter-American system for the protection of human
rights to play an increasingly important role. The fact that today all Latin American
governments in the region, with the exception of Cuba, have been democratically
elected has produced significant improvements in the human rights situation in
these countries. These states have now also ratified the Convention and accepted
the jurisdiction of the Court. This leaves only a small number of OAS member
states – some Commonwealth Caribbean countries as well as the United States and
Canada – out of the system established by the Convention.
The increase in the number of ratifications of the Convention and acceptances
of the Court’s jurisdiction has made it possible for more and more cases to be
referred to the Court. Today the Court can point to a significant body of law that

xv
xvi Foreword

has evolved from its judgments in contentious cases, its advisory opinions, as well
as its provisional measures. In her book, Professor Jo M. Pasqualucci provides the
first truly comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of this practice. Here we have a
book that needed to be written. It puts all of us interested in the work and role of
the Inter-American Court in her debt for writing it and for the fine scholarship it
represents.
Scholars and practitioners will find in this book a valuable review of all relevant
elements of the Court’s practice, including issues relating to admissibility, fact-
finding, provisional measures, oral and written proceedings, and scope of judgments.
Also discussed are those aspects of the practice of the Inter-American Commission
on Human Rights that bear on the work of the Court. The author discusses the new
Rules of Procedure of the Court and the Commission and the legal consequences
they have for the interrelationship between these two institutions. In addition to
providing the reader with a practical guide to the Court’s procedure and modus
operandi that practitioners should find particularly useful, Professor Pasqualucci
succeeds in carefully analyzing the Court’s practice in a creative and sound critical
manner.
There is a great deal of material in these pages that scholars will find of value
in seeking to understand the Court’s jurisprudence and how it has evolved over
the years. The book contains important insights about the Court’s methodology
and its transformation of the American Convention into an effective tool for the
protection of human rights in the Americas, as well as various examples of the
Court’s contribution to international human rights law in general. No one trying to
understand the manner in which the Court functions can afford to be without this
book.
Professor Pasqualucci had been working on this book, which started as a doctoral
dissertation, on and off for more than a decade. This led me and my successors as her
dissertation supervisors to become increasingly concerned that the book would never
see the light of day. Now it is clear, however, that at the time when we encouraged
her to get on with the job, the Court’s practice had not reached the level of judicial
maturity or ripeness that would have enabled her to produce the truly valuable work
she has now published. An impatient former professor herewith admits his error and
expresses his delight with his former student’s wisdom and patient scholarship that
have resulted in the publication of this outstanding work.

Thomas Buergenthal
Former President of the Inter-American
Court and Judge, International Court of
Justice
 Preface to the Second Edition

Since the first edition of this book was published in 2003, the Inter-American Court of
Human Rights has made major changes in its procedure and practice. In November
2009, as a result of a participatory and transparent communication process among all
Inter-American human rights system participants, including Inter-American Court
judges, commissioners, States, and civil society, the Inter-American Commission and
the Inter-American Court modified their procedures relating to individual cases. The
revised procedures make the Inter-American human rights system more efficient and
transparent and further enhance the role of the victim. This second edition of the
book incorporates the changes made in the procedures and practice of the Inter-
American Court from 2003 through May 2012. During that time period, that Court
has issued more than 135 new judgments, more than 300 provisional measures
orders, and approximately 285 orders monitoring compliance with its judgments,
which have allowed the Court to further develop its procedures in dealing with
individual cases.
Chapter 1 provides a background of the Inter-American Court and introduces the
changes made by the Commission and the Court since they redrafted their Rules
of Procedure effective as of 2001. It also sets forth the stages of a sample case that
was processed under the new procedures. The chapter concludes with a breakdown
of the limitations and threats currently confronting the Inter-American Court in
particular and the Inter-American human rights system in general.
Chapter 2 on Advisory Procedures needed little updating. The Court has issued
only three advisory opinions since the first edition of this book was published in
2003. Most of the Court’s activity has been in the area of its contentious jurisdiction
and orders of provisional measures.
The former Chapter 3 on Preliminary Objections, which included jurisdictional
challenges to the Court and complaints that the Commission had not followed
the American Convention’s admissibility procedures, has been divided into two
chapters. The current Chapter 3 deals with proceedings before the Commission.

xvii
xviii Preface to the Second Edition

All contentious cases must first be dealt with by the Commission before they can
be referred to the Court. For those States that are not parties to the American
Convention or have not accepted the jurisdiction of the Court, the proceeding
before the Commission is the final stage in the Inter-American system. This chapter
is relevant in that it sets forth the procedures with which the petitioners and the
Commission are to comply if the Court is to reach the merits of the case. It is
also the chapter that is most relevant for complaints brought against the United
States, Canada, Belize, and some English-speaking Caribbean States because those
complaints are handled solely by the Commission.
The current Chapter 4 deals with jurisdictional issues before the American Court.
The Court must have jurisdiction ratione materiae, personae, temporis, and loci to
consider a case. The Court has particularly refined its jurisprudence in the area of
jurisdiction ratione temporis for continuing violations, which are those violations
that began before the State was subject to the Court’s jurisdiction but that continued
thereafter.
Chapter 5 describes and analyzes changes to the Court’s procedures in contentious
cases, particularly the revised role of the Inter-American Commission, which no
longer represents victims before the Court. The Commission now represents the
Inter-American public order of human rights. An Inter-American public defender is
assigned to represent alleged victims who cannot afford legal representation, and the
Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund may pay for the production of evidence. The Court
has also established expedited procedures to deal with the increased number of
cases forwarded to it by the Commission, and it has further developed its evidentiary
criteria.
Chapter 6 on Reparations has been completely reorganized to reflect the Court’s
well-developed jurisprudence in the area of reparations. In the last decade, the
Court has honed its sweeping orders of victim-centered and community-centered
equitable remedies, including measures of restitution, satisfaction, rehabilitation,
and guarantees of nonrepetition. The Court has dealt with many multi-victim cases,
some involving hundreds of victims who have been affected by massacres. These
cases have required innovative forms of reparations. The Court has also rendered
decisions in indigenous land rights cases in which it has ordered States to return
ancestral lands to the indigenous people or to demarcate and grant them title to the
lands on which they live. The Court’s remedial orders may require compliance not
only by the executive branch of the domestic government but also by the legislative
and judicial branches.
Chapter 7 on Provisional Measures includes the modified grounds and procedures
developed by the Court in ordering provisional measures. It evaluates the Court’s
standards for gravity, urgency, and irreparable damage to persons and sets forth the
types of conditions in which the Court is likely to order or maintain provisional
measures and when it is likely to terminate them. The chapter also analyzes State
compliance and noncompliance with various orders of provisional measures.
 Preface to the Second Edition xix

Chapter 8 on State compliance sets forth those areas of Court-ordered reparations

with which States have high, medium, and low rates of compliance. It focuses on
the Court’s monitoring of its reparations orders, evaluates the reasons that States do
not comply with specific types of reparations, analyzes difficulties hindering State
compliance, offers some resolutions, and provides examples of State compliance
with every type of reparations ordered by the Court.
 Preface

This work is the culmination of fifteen years of study of the Inter-American Court
of Human Rights. I did not set out to study the Inter-American Court. In 1986,
during my final year of law school, I was in the office of Professor Richard Bilder
at the University of Wisconsin. I had decided to apply for a Fulbright fellowship,
and he was helping me formulate my proposal. At that moment, Professor Bilder
received a telephone call from his longtime friend Thomas Buergenthal, a judge on
the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. In their conversation Professor Bilder
mentioned that there was a student in his office who spoke Spanish and who was
applying for a Fulbright to Central America. Judge Buergenthal immediately saw the
possibility of having assistance with legal research. He offered to write a letter to the
Fulbright Commission inviting me to be affiliated with the Court. That serendipitous
telephone call led to my long-term relationship with the Inter-American Court and
to the focus of my subsequent scholarship.
I began my tenure at the Court in 1986 when it was considering its first contentious
cases, the Honduran Disappearance Cases. The experience opened my eyes to the
realities of human rights abuse. I cried over letters in the file from the father of
Francisco Fairén Garbi, a Costa Rican youth who disappeared on a trip through
Central America. I vacillated between despair at the cruelty reflected in the facts
of the cases, and excitement and awe at being present and involved in this historic
stage of the Court’s evolution. The Court was only beginning to set its jurisdictional
parameters and to establish its rules on practice and procedure. It was like clerking
for the U.S. Supreme Court in the days of John Marshall.
I remember long talks with Judge Buergenthal in which he expressed his absolute
faith that we were slowly, step by step, building a system that would some day
function effectively to protect human rights in the Western hemisphere. At that
time there was little evidence that his faith would be fulfilled. Even the mention of
human rights in many Latin American countries could result in the speaker being
labeled a “communist.” The Inter-American system was not functioning optimally.

xxi
xxii Preface

The Commission, which had been in existence since 1960, did not refer contentious
cases to the Court for several years after the Court’s formation. As a result, in the
Court’s first seven years of existence, the Court handed down only advisory opinions.
Judge Buergenthal’s quiet optimism and his belief in a positive future had a profound
influence on my outlook. He explained the basis for his attitude in a speech that
he delivered in 1986, when he, a Jewish survivor of Auschwitz and Sachsenhausen,
accepted an honorary doctorate from the University of Heidelberg Faculty of Law
in Germany. In it he asked,

Who would have thought in 1939, for example, that I would be standing here
today; who would have believed in 1940 that there would exist a European Com-
munity composed of democratic nations, a European Parliament and a European
Commission and Court of Human Rights, and that a new Germany would be a
very important part of it all? Who would have believed then that at least a part of
the Europe of old, with its nationalistic animosities and military rivalries, would
undergo this transformation? Certainly no realist, and probably not even your aver-
age idealist. For an international lawyer who works in the field of human rights,
these developments and the many others I could cite are a strong medicine against
the loss of faith and a strong incentive for believing that what may appear impossible
today may well come true tomorrow or the day after.

In every State, even those that appear to be the most recalcitrant human rights
offenders, there are those who are attempting to enforce the rule of law. Those
persons and organizations take great risks promoting democracy and human rights.
Most others, although not active out of fear or malaise, would prefer to live in a State
where human rights are observed. When the domestic institutions do not have the
will or are not capable of prosecuting human rights violations and bringing human
rights violators to justice, resort to international enforcement organs, such as the
Inter-American Commission and Court, may be the only avenue to strengthen and
support those on the domestic plane who are fighting for justice.
It is my hope that this study of the practice and procedure of the Inter-American
Court will contribute to making possible the effective protection of human rights
in the Americas. Procedural transparency, effectiveness, and efficiency are essential
to the enforcement of substantive human rights. As such, the procedural evolution
and the practice of the Inter-American Court have direct bearing on the fulfillment
of individual human rights in the Americas.
This book includes, when relevant, an analysis of the cases and opinions rendered
by the Court through May 2012, and of the Rules of Procedure of the Court and
Commission that came into effect in 2010. Portions of earlier versions of chapters of
this book have been published as “Advisory Practice of the Inter-American Court of
Human Rights: Contributing to the Evolution of International Human Rights Law,”
38 Stanford Journal of International Law, 241 (2002); “Preliminary Objections Before
the Inter-American Court of Human Rights,” 40 Virginia Journal of International
 Preface xxiii

Law, 1 (1999); “Victim Reparations in the Inter-American Human Rights System:

A Critical Assessment of Current Practice and Procedure,” 18 Michigan Journal
of International Law, 1 (1996); “The Inter-American Human Rights System: Estab-
lishing Precedents and Procedure in Human Rights Law,” 26 University of Miami
Inter-American Law Review, 297 (1994–1995); “The Whole Truth and Nothing But
the Truth: Truth Commissions, Impunity and the Inter-American Human Rights
System,” 12 Boston University International Law Journal, 321 (1994); “Provisional
Measures in the Inter-American Human Rights System: An Innovative Development
in International Law,” 26 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 803 (1993); and
“The Evolution of International Indigenous Rights in the Inter-American Human
Rights System,” 6 Human Rights Law Review 281 (2006).
 Acknowledgments

It seems to me and to most people who know me that I have been writing this
book for my entire professional life. No sooner did I finish a chapter than the Inter-
American Court would render a judgment or update its Rules of Procedure that
would necessitate rewriting and updating it. Throughout this ordeal, my friends and
colleagues have remained supportive, always asking the obligatory question, “How
is your book coming along?“ and then listening to the recital of my latest insight or
frustration. I would like to thank them for their interest and understanding.
I am especially grateful to Thomas Buergenthal, who has been my inspiration since
1986. Without his suggestion and encouragement I never would have undertaken
this study of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. His comments on drafts
of the initial chapters, before he was elected Judge on the International Court of
Justice, were invaluable. I also wish to thank Professor Louis B. Sohn, who unfailingly
gave of his precious time to inspire me and encourage me, and Professors Ralph
G. Steinhardt and Sean Murphy who served on my dissertation committee and
advised me.
I must also express my gratitude to Christina Cerna, David Padilla, Veronica
Gomez, Manuel Ventura Robles, and the other attorneys and staff members of the
Secretariats of the Court and Commission who patiently answered my questions,
located documents for me, and published their own articles that clarified the law in
action. All opinions and analysis herein are my own.

xxv
 Table of Cases

INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY

OPINIONS
Article 55 of the American Convention on Human Rights, IACtHR, Advisory Opinion
OC-20/2009 of 29 September 2009, Ser. A, No. 20, 54, 159
Certain Attributes of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Arts. 41, 42, 44,
46, 47, 50 and 51 of the American Convention on Human Rights), IACtHR, Advisory
Opinion OC-13/93 of 16 July 1993, Ser. A, No. 13, 53, 54, 110, 113
Compatibility of Draft Legislation with Art. 8(2)(h) of the American Convention on
Human Rights, IACtHR, Advisory Opinion OC-12/91 of 6 December 1991, Ser. A,
No. 12, 57, 58, 61, 65
Compulsory Membership in an Association Prescribed by Law for the Practice of Journal-
ism (Arts. 13 and 29 of the American Convention on Human Rights), IACtHR, Advisory
Opinion OC-5/85 of 13 November 1985, Ser. A, No. 5, 45, 49, 60, 61, 75, 77
Control of Legality in the Practice of Authorities of the Inter-American Commis-
sion on Human Rights (Arts. 41 & 44 to 51 of the American Convention on
Human Rights), IACtHR, Advisory Opinion OC-19/05 of November 28, 2005, Ser. A,
No. 19, 74, 84, 85, 100
Effect of Reservations on the Entry into Force of the American Convention on Human
Rights (Arts. 74 and 75), IACtHR, Advisory Opinion OC-2/82 of 24 September 1982, Ser.
A, No. 2, 12, 43, 44, 56, 119, 129
Exceptions to the Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies (Arts. 46(1), 46(2)(a) and 46(2)(b) of
the American Convention on Human Rights), IACtHR, Advisory Opinion OC-11/90 of
10 August 1990, Ser. A, No. 11, 52, 53, 98, 133
Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations (Arts. 27(2) and 7(6) of the American Convention
on Human Rights), IACtHR, Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of 30 January 1987, Ser. A,
No. 8, 49, 61
International Responsibility for the Promulgation and Enforcement of Laws in Violation of
the Convention (Arts. 1 and 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights), IACtHR,
Advisory Opinion OC-14/94 of 9 December 1994, Ser. A, No. 14, 39, 41, 42, 75, 133, 134
Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man Within the
Framework of Art. 64 of the American Convention on Human Rights, IACtHR, Advisory
Opinion OC-10/89 of 14 July 1989, Ser. A, No. 10, 55, 56, 69, 74

xxvii
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
the system inaugurated by David, and treats this edifying topic at
some length.

²And Hezekiah appointed the courses of the

priests and the Levites after their courses,
every man according to his service, both the
priests and the Levites, for burnt offerings and
for peace offerings, to minister, and to give
thanks, and to praise in the gates of the camp
of the Lord.
2. the courses] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiv. 1 ff.

to minister, and to give thanks, and to praise in the gates] Better,

as LXX., altering the order, to give thanks and to praise and to
minister in the gates. “To minister in the gates,” i.e. to be
doorkeepers, compare 1 Chronicles xxvi. 1.

the camp of the Lord] i.e. (in the language of Deuteronomy) “the
place which the Lord chose,” Jerusalem or, more exactly, the Temple
area. Compare 1 Chronicles ix. 18, note.

³He appointed also the king’s portion of his

substance for the burnt offerings, to wit, for the
morning and evening burnt offerings, and the
burnt offerings for the sabbaths, and for the
new moons, and for the set feasts, as it is
written in the law of the Lord. ⁴Moreover he
commanded the people that dwelt in
Jerusalem to give the portion of the priests
and the Levites, that they might give
themselves ¹ to the law of the Lord.
 ¹ Hebrew be strong in.

3. the burnt offerings] Compare viii. 12, 13.

⁵And as soon as the commandment came

abroad, the children of Israel gave in
abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil,
and honey, and of all the increase of the field;
and the tithe of all things brought they in
abundantly.
5. and honey] Honey (Hebrew dĕbhash) is not elsewhere
mentioned as subject to tithe; perhaps grape syrup (modern Arabic
dibs) is meant here, as in Genesis xliii. 11 and Ezekiel xxvii. 17
(according to some commentators). Honey (like leaven) was
forbidden for sacrificial use (Leviticus ii. 11).

⁶And the children of Israel and Judah, that

dwelt in the cities of Judah, they also brought
in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and the tithe of
dedicated things which were consecrated unto
the Lord their God, and laid them by heaps.
6. And the children of Israel] Compare xi. 16.

the tithe of dedicated things] a strange phrase without parallel.

Read probably the dedicated things.

⁷In the third month they began to lay the

foundation of the heaps, and finished them in
the seventh month. ⁸And when Hezekiah and
the princes came and saw the heaps, they
 blessed the Lord, and his people Israel.
⁹Then Hezekiah questioned with the priests
and the Levites concerning the heaps.
7. the third month] The Feast of Harvest took place at the
beginning of this month and seven weeks later the Feast of
Ingathering followed.

¹⁰And Azariah the chief priest, of the house of

Zadok, answered him and said, Since the
people began to bring the oblations into the
house of the Lord, we have eaten and had
enough, and have left plenty: for the Lord
hath blessed his people; and that which is left
is this great store.
10. Azariah the chief priest] Not mentioned in connection with
Hezekiah’s previous arrangements.

of the house of Zadok] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiv. 1‒4. Tradition

spoke of two main families of priests, (1) the descendants of Eleazar
the third son of Aaron, whose chief representative in David’s day
was Zadok (hence they are here called “the house of Zadok”), (2) the
descendants of Ithamar the fourth son of Aaron, represented in
David’s time by Ahimelech (Saul’s victim) or by Abiathar (David’s
protégé). The Chronicler prefers to name the descendants of Ithamar
after Ahimelech (1 Chronicles xxiv. 3, where see note).

the oblations] “The Hebrew word, tĕrūmāh, denotes properly

what is ‘taken off’ from a larger mass and so separated from it for
sacred purposes.” The word is sometimes rendered heave offering,
but this is due to a mistaken impression that a rite of elevation was
involved (see the full note in Driver, Exodus, p. 263).
 hath blessed his people] Compare Malachi iii. 10.

and that which is left is this great store] The Hebrew requires
some correction. Read as the LXX., καὶ κατελίπομεν ἐπὶ τὸ πλῆθος
τοῦτο, “we leave (‘have left’) this great store and more.”

11‒13. The offerings mentioned in verses 5‒10 were placed in

charge of Conaniah, Shimei and their subordinates for storage in the
Temple treasuries.

¹¹Then Hezekiah commanded to prepare

chambers in the house of the Lord; and they
prepared them.
11. chambers] compare 1 Chronicles ix. 26, note.

¹²And they brought in the oblations and the

tithes and the dedicated things faithfully: and
over them Conaniah the Levite was ruler, and
Shimei his brother was second.
12. the dedicated things] Compare xxix. 33 (note on the
consecrated things).

¹³And Jehiel, and Azaziah, and Nahath, and

Asahel, and Jerimoth, and Jozabad, and Eliel,
and Ismachiah, and Mahath, and Benaiah,
were overseers under the hand of Conaniah
and Shimei his brother, by the appointment of
Hezekiah the king, and Azariah the ruler of the
house of God.
 13. the ruler of the house of God] Compare 1 Chronicles ix. 11,
note.

14‒19. Distribution of the stores referred to in verses 11‒13 was

the duty of Kore and his subordinates. The exact meaning and
sequence of these verses is hard to follow, and probably the
obscurity is due to faults in the Hebrew text. The simplest view is as
follows: verse 15 states that the distribution was to be made to
priestly and levitical persons resident in the priestly cities but (verse
16) not to those who were for the time being on duty at the Temple,
since these no doubt would receive their share at the Temple itself.
Then verses 17‒19 seem to refer to the manner of the registration of
priests and Levites respectively for the purpose of the distribution;
but it must be confessed that the precise sense and connection are
uncertain, particularly as regards verse 19.

¹⁴And Kore the son of Imnah the Levite, the

porter at the east gate, was over the freewill
offerings of God, to distribute the oblations of
the Lord, and the most holy things.
14. the most holy things] To this class belonged the shewbread
(Leviticus xxiv. 9), the meal offering (Leviticus ii. 2, 3, vi. 14‒18 [7‒
11, Hebrew]), the sin offering (Leviticus vi. 25‒30), and the trespass
offering (Leviticus vii. 1‒7). These could be eaten by the priests only
and in the holy place only.

¹⁵And under him were Eden, and Miniamin,

and Jeshua, and Shemaiah, Amariah, and
Shecaniah, in the cities of the priests, in their
set office ¹, to give to their brethren by courses,
as well to the great as to the small:
¹ Or, trust.
 15. in the cities] The priestly cities are given 1 Chronicles vi. 54‒
60.

to the great as to the small] i.e. to old and to young alike.

¹⁶beside them that were reckoned by

genealogy of males, from three years old and
upward, even every one that entered into the
house of the Lord, as the duty of every day
required ¹, for their service in their charges
according to their courses;
¹ Or, for his daily portion.

16. beside] i.e. with the exception of.

as the duty of every day required] Or, as margin, for his daily
portion.

¹⁷and them that were reckoned by genealogy

of the priests by their fathers’ houses, and the
Levites from twenty years old and upward, in
their charges by their courses;
17. and them that] Render probably and as for the registration
of the priests it was made by their families....

¹⁸and them ¹ that were reckoned by genealogy

of all their little ones, their wives, and their
sons, and their daughters, through all the
congregation: for in their set office ² they
sanctified themselves in holiness:
 ¹ Or, even to give to them &c. ² Or, trust.

18. and them that] Render, and the registration included all
their little ones, etc. The connection of the last part of the verse is
very obscure.

their set office] Or, as margin, their trust (so also above verse
15).

they sanctified themselves in holiness] Or, they busied

themselves with the distribution of the sanctified things. No reliance
can be placed on the soundness of the text.

¹⁹also for the sons of Aaron the priests, which

were in the fields of the suburbs of their cities,
in every several city, there were men that were
expressed by name, to give portions to all the
males among the priests, and to all that were
reckoned by genealogy among the Levites.
²⁰And thus did Hezekiah throughout all Judah;
and he wrought that which was good and right
and faithful ¹ before the Lord his God. ²¹And in
every work that he began in the service of the
house of God, and in the law, and in the
commandments, to seek his God, he did it
with all his heart, and prospered.
¹ Hebrew faithfulness.

19. Again a most obscure verse, apparently meaning that the

priests had certain special officers, other than Kore and his
subordinates, who were charged with superintending the distribution
in the outlying districts. Text and interpretation are alike uncertain.
Kittel regards verses 17‒19 as a late addition.

the suburbs] compare 1 Chronicles v. 16 (margin “pasture

lands”), vi. 55, 57 [40, 42, Hebrew].

Chapter XXXII.
1‒8 (compare 2 Kings xviii. 13‒16).
Sennacherib’s threatened Invasion. Hezekiah’s Precautions.

The Chronicler introduces us somewhat abruptly to the Assyrian

crisis. From 2 Kings we learn that Hezekiah renounced the
suzerainty of Assyria (xviii. 7), which his father Ahaz had
acknowledged (2 Kings xvi. 7). Thereupon Sennacherib invaded
Judah, and Hezekiah was obliged to acknowledge with a heavy
payment of tribute his dependence on the Assyrian king (2 Kings
xviii. 13‒16). Sennacherib having discovered the weakness of
Judah, next demanded an unconditional surrender, intending to
transport the Jews to another country (2 Kings xviii. 31, 32). This
demand Hezekiah resisted, being strengthened thereto by Isaiah.
The Chronicler does not refer to the earlier invasion or to the tribute
—such a humiliation of the pious and devoted king being in his belief
unthinkable. That any invasion should have taken place “after these
things and this faithfulness” was sufficiently astonishing, until the
issue showed that the anxiety and distress were only for the greater
glory of Israel’s God and for the further proof of Hezekiah’s trust in
Him.

¹After these things, and this faithfulness,

Sennacherib king of Assyria came, and
entered into Judah, and encamped against the
 fenced cities, and thought to win them ¹ for
himself. ²And when Hezekiah saw that
Sennacherib was come, and that he was
purposed ² to fight against Jerusalem,
¹ Hebrew to break them up.

² Hebrew his face was to fight.

1. After these things, and this faithfulness] The phrase is a

hendiadys and stands for, “After these faithful dealings.”

Sennacherib] This king (Sanḥērib in Hebrew, Sin-aḥi-irib [-irba] in

Assyrian, the Σαναχάριβος of Herod. II. 141) reigned 705‒681 b.c. He
was the son of Sargon (Isaiah xx. 1), father of Esar-haddon (2 Kings
xix. 37; Ezra iv. 3), and grandfather of Asshur-bani-pal, the well-
known Σαρδανάπαλλος of Herod. II. 150, who is commonly identified
with Osnappar (compare Ezra iv. 10). Under this dynasty Assyria
reached the height of its power. The empire included Babylonia
(which, however, was frequently in revolt), Assyria proper, Syria as
far north as Cilicia (inclusive), and (under Esar-haddon and Asshur-
bani-pal) Egypt. After Asshur-bani-pal’s death (about 626 b.c.) the
Assyrian power was speedily destroyed. The form Sennacherib is
derived from the LXX. through the Vulgate.

to win them] Literally to make breaches in them. According to 2

Kings xviii. 13 Sennacherib took these cites; and the Assyrian
account on the “Prism Inscription” of Sennacherib which is preserved
in the British Museum states that they were forty-six in number
(compare Driver in Hogarth, Authority and Archaeology, pp. 104‒
107; or Handcock, Latest Light on Bible Lands, pp. 153 ff.).

³he took counsel with his princes and his

mighty men to stop the waters of the fountains
 which were without the city; and they helped
him.
3. to stop the waters] Compare 2 Kings xx. 20 “[Hezekiah] made
the pool and the conduit and brought water into the city,” and Isaiah
xxii. 9, 11.

At the present day there is an underground tunnel cut through the

rock leading from St Mary’s Well down to the Lower Pool of Siloam
(Bädeker, Palestine⁵, pp. 25, 83). It is rudely constructed and owing
to its windings is 586 yards long, though the distance in a straight
line is only 368 yards. As therefore the Lower Pool was probably
within the ancient walls, while St Mary’s Well was outside, this tunnel
may be Hezekiah’s conduit. If the well were stopped, the besiegers
would lose the water, which would collect in the Pool for the use of
the besieged. An inscription in ancient Hebrew characters (“The
Siloam Inscription”) discovered in situ describes briefly the digging of
the tunnel, but does not enable us to fix the date of it with certainty.
For the original text and an English translation see G. A. Smith,
Jerusalem, I. 95 f., or Driver, Notes on Hebrew Text of Samuel, viii.
ff.

⁴So there was gathered much people together,

and they stopped all the fountains, and the
brook that flowed through the midst of the
land, saying, Why should the kings of Assyria
come, and find much water?
4. the brook that flowed] The Hebrew verb means “flow with
strong stream” (as a flood). We naturally look for such a brook either
east of Jerusalem in the valley of Kidron or south in the valley of the
son of Hinnom, but no perennial stream runs in either valley now.
Possibly (owing to physical changes in the configuration of the
country) the waters which fed such a brook in the Chronicler’s day
now lose themselves in the soil.
 ⁵And he took courage, and built up all the wall
that was broken down, and raised it up to the
towers ¹, and the other ² wall without, and
strengthened Millo in the city of David, and
made weapons and shields in abundance.
¹ Or, heightened the towers Or, went up upon the towers The
Vulgate has, built towers thereon.

² Or, another.

5. broken dozen] Compare xxv. 23 (note).

raised it up to the towers] Hebrew vayya‘al ‘al. Read and he

heightened the towers, i.e. omitting the second ’al as a dittography.

the other wall] In Isaiah xxii. 9‒11 the preparations to meet the
Assyrian attack are described by the prophet who speaks of a “ditch”
(Revised Version “reservoir”) made at this time between “the two
walls.” In Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894‒1897, Dr Bliss describes
a buttressed wall (pp. 96 ff.) built without lime (see his frontispiece
for an illustration of it) and enclosing the pool of Siloam on the south-
east, which, he says, “may date back as far as Hezekiah” (pp. 325
f.). Dr Bliss also, following up a clue given by earlier explorers, found
a second wall (running at an angle to the first) enclosing the pool on
the west. This second wall was probably due to Herod, but Dr Bliss
suggests that the line it follows may have been defended by a wall
as early as Hezekiah’s day (p. 326). For further discussion see G. A.
Smith, Jerusalem, I. 182, 207.

Millo] compare 1 Chronicles xi. 8, note.

weapons and shields] Properly, darts and shields. These were

meant, not for such trained soldiers as Hezekiah could collect, but
for the levy en masse with which the king proposed to man the walls.
A dart to throw and a shield to protect the thrower as he threw were
all that the citizen-soldier needed. The Hebrew word (shelaḥ) means
“dart, missile”; the more general rendering “weapons” obscures the
precise nature of Hezekiah’s preparations.

⁶And he set captains of war over the people,

and gathered them together to him in the
broad place at the gate of the city, and spake
comfortably to them, saying, ⁷Be strong and of
a good courage, be not afraid nor dismayed
for the king of Assyria, nor for all the multitude
that is with him: for there is a greater ¹ with us
than with him:
¹ Or, there be more.

6. in the broad place at the gate] Compare xxix. 4; Nehemiah viii.

16. There is nothing here to show which of the two broad places
mentioned in Nehemiah is meant, or whether some third place is
intended.

⁸with him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the

Lord our God to help us, and to fight our
battles. And the people rested themselves
upon the words of Hezekiah king of Judah.
8. an arm of flesh] Compare Jeremiah xvii. 5. Contrast the
frequent phrase “a mighty hand and a stretched out arm” (of
Jehovah). An “arm” is an ally or helper.

with us is the Lord] Compare xv. 2, xx. 17; Isaiah viii. 10.
 9‒19 (compare 2 Kings xviii. 17‒35).
Sennacherib’s Threatening Messages.

In this section Chronicles briefly and freely summarises 2 Kings.

⁹After this did Sennacherib king of Assyria

send his servants to Jerusalem, (now he was
before Lachish, and all his power with him,)
unto Hezekiah king of Judah, and unto all
Judah that were at Jerusalem, saying,
9. his servants] Three of these are specified in 2 Kings by their
titles, viz. the Tartan (“Commander-in-chief”), the Rabsaris (perhaps
“Chief of the Princes”), and the Rabshakeh (“Chief of the officers or
cup-bearers”).

now he was before Lachish] The capture of Lachish by

Sennacherib and its spoliation are shown on an Assyrian relief now
in the British Museum. The king himself besieged Lachish because it
was of more importance for the main object of the campaign than
Jerusalem. Sennacherib’s objective was Egypt (Herodotus II. 141),
and Lachish (Tell el-Ḥesi, Bädeker, Palestine⁵, p. 118) lay directly in
his path (compare Handcock, Latest Light on Bible Lands, p. 151).

¹⁰Thus saith Sennacherib king of Assyria,

Whereon do ye trust, that ye abide the siege ¹
in Jerusalem?
¹ Or, in the strong hold.

10. in Jerusalem] Isaiah promised deliverance in Jerusalem; e.g.

in Isaiah xxix. 8, xxx. 19.
 ¹¹Doth not Hezekiah persuade you, to give you
over to die by famine and by thirst, saying,
The Lord our God shall deliver us out of the
hand of the king of Assyria?
11. persuade] Or “entice”; compare 1 Chronicles xxi. 1
(“provoked” for the same Hebrew word).

¹²Hath not the same Hezekiah taken away his

high places and his altars, and commanded
Judah and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall
worship before one altar, and upon it shall ye
burn incense?
12. Hath not the same Hezekiah taken away] Besides this appeal
to the religious prejudices of the people, Sennacherib’s servants
employed two other arguments, according to 2 Kings—(1) the
paucity of Hezekiah’s soldiers (2 Kings xviii. 23) and (2) possible
reliance on Egyptian help (2 Kings xviii. 21, 25). These two
arguments are passed over by the Chronicler doubtless because
they seemed inconsistent both with the power and the character of a
king so God-fearing as Hezekiah.

his high places] compare 2 Kings xviii. 4. The “high places”

(bāmōth) were properly sanctuaries of Jehovah, and not necessarily
idolatrous in themselves. But since originally all, or almost all, of
these bāmōth had been sacred places of the Canaanite gods, old
idolatrous symbols (e.g. the ashērah) and old idolatrous ideas and
rites persisted in the worship there offered. When finally the Jews
restricted sacrificial worship to Jerusalem, the odium attaching to
these “high places” became greater than ever, and hostility towards
them came to be regarded as the mark of any pious monarch.
Hezekiah removed the bāmōth throughout the country.
 ¹³Know ye not what I and my fathers have
done unto all the peoples of the lands? Were
the gods of the nations of the lands any ways
able to deliver their land out of mine hand?
¹⁴Who was there among all the gods of those
nations which my fathers utterly destroyed ¹,
that could deliver his people out of mine hand,
that your God should be able to deliver you
out of mine hand? ¹⁵Now therefore let not
Hezekiah deceive you, nor persuade you on
this manner, neither believe ye him: for no god
of any nation or kingdom was able to deliver
his people out of mine hand, and out of the
hand of my fathers: how much less shall your
God ² deliver you out of mine hand? ¹⁶And his
servants spake yet more against the Lord
God, and against his servant Hezekiah.
¹ Hebrew devoted. ² Or, gods.

13. the peoples of the lands] In 2 Kings xviii. 34 the lands are
specified and include Samaria.

¹⁷He wrote also letters ¹, to rail on the Lord,

the God of Israel, and to speak against him,
saying, As the gods of the nations of the
lands, which have not delivered their people
out of mine hand, so shall not the God of
Hezekiah deliver his people out of mine hand.
 ¹ Or, a letter.

17. to rail on] Or, to defy (the same Hebrew word as in 2 Kings
xix. 4, 16, 22, 33, and there rendered “reproach”).

¹⁸And they cried with a loud voice in the Jews’

language unto the people of Jerusalem that
were on the wall, to affright them, and to
trouble them; that they might take the city.
18. in the Jews’ language] i.e. in Hebrew. From the parallel
passage, 2 Kings xviii. 26 ff., it is evident that the language of
diplomacy at this time in Western Asia was Aramaic (“Syrian,” 2
Kings); and that, whilst understood by the Jewish leaders and
officials, it was not yet intelligible to the common people. In the
negotiations the Rabshakeh showed clearly that his object was not
to treat with Hezekiah, but to excite a revolt among the Jews against
Hezekiah and so gain possession of the city.

¹⁹And they spake of the God of Jerusalem, as

of the gods of the peoples of the earth, which
are the work of men’s hands.
19. the God of Jerusalem] For this designation compare Psalms
cxxxv. 21.

20‒23 (compare 2 Kings xix. 1‒4, 14‒19, 35‒37).

Hezekiah and Isaiah pray. The Deliverance.

This section is a very brief summary of 2 Kings xix.

²⁰And Hezekiah the king, and Isaiah the

prophet the son of Amoz, prayed because of
this, and cried to heaven.
 20. And Hezekiah ... and Isaiah ... prayed] According to Kings,
Hezekiah prayed, and was answered by God through the medium of
a message delivered by Isaiah the prophet (2 Kings xix. 20‒34).

heaven] Here used reverently for “God”; compare xxviii. 9; Daniel

iv. 26; Luke xv. 21.

²¹And the Lord sent an angel, which cut off all

the mighty men of valour, and the leaders and
captains, in the camp of the king of Assyria.
So he returned with shame of face to his own
land. And when he was come into the house
of his god, they that came forth of his own
bowels slew him ¹ there with the sword.
¹ Hebrew caused him to fall.

21. all the mighty men] In number 185,000 according to 2 Kings

xix. 35 and Isaiah xxxvii. 36. The agency was probably the plague,
which is pictured as a destroying angel in 2 Samuel xxiv. 16.

And when he was come] The murder of Sennacherib did not

occur till some 20 years after his Judean expedition (circa 701 b.c.),
i.e. not till 681 b.c.

they that came forth] The Chronicler no doubt follows Isaiah

xxxvii. 38, “Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him”; but the
accuracy of the present text of this passage of Isaiah is doubtful, for
in the parallel passage (2 Kings xix. 37, Kethīb) the words his sons
are missing. The only notice of Sennacherib’s death known to us at
present from the inscriptions reads “Sennacherib king of Assyria was
slain by his son (singular) in a revolt.” No name is given to this son.
(Driver in Hogarth, Authority and Archaeology, p. 109.)
 ²²Thus the Lord saved Hezekiah and the
inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of
Sennacherib the king of Assyria, and from the
hand of all other, and guided them on every
side.
22. guided them on every side] Read, as the LXX., gave them
rest on every side; compare xx. 30.

²³And many brought gifts unto the Lord to

Jerusalem, and precious things to Hezekiah
king of Judah: so that he was exalted in the
sight of all nations from thenceforth.
23. brought gifts] Compare Psalms lxviii. 29; Isaiah xviii. 7;
Haggai ii. 7, 8.

24‒33 (compare 2 Kings xx.; Isaiah xxxviii., xxxix.).

Hezekiah’s Sickness. The Ambassadors from Babylon.
Hezekiah’s Death.

²⁴In those days Hezekiah was sick even

unto death: and he prayed unto the Lord; and
he spake unto him, and gave him a sign ¹.
¹ Or, wonder.

24. Remark that this single verse epitomises 2 Kings xx. 1‒11.

In those days] The phrase is taken over from 2 Kings xx. 1, and it
cannot be determined what date is intended, though we may
conclude from 2 Kings xx. 6 that it was a time at which the Assyrian
danger was not yet past, and that it was about the fourteenth year of
Hezekiah (compare Barnes on 2 Kings xx. 1).

he spake] The Hebrew word means, in certain connections, “to

promise,” and the idea of “promise” is present here, the sense being
“God made him a promise and confirmed it by a wonder”; compare 2
Kings xx. 5, 6, 8‒11.

a sign] Rather, a wonder (margin), as in verse 31.

²⁵But Hezekiah rendered not again according

to the benefit done unto him; for his heart was
lifted up: therefore there was wrath upon him,
and upon Judah and Jerusalem.
25. his heart was lifted up] Compare verse 31; 2 Kings xx. 12‒15.

wrath] Hebrew ḳeṣeph, a visitation of Divine wrath; compare xix.

2, 10, xxiv. 18, xxix. 8.

²⁶Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself

for the pride ¹ of his heart, both he and the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of
the Lord came not upon them in the days of
Hezekiah.
¹ Hebrew the lifting up.

26. humbled himself] Compare 2 Kings xx. 19.

²⁷And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches

and honour: and he provided him treasuries
for silver, and for gold, and for precious
 stones, and for spices, and for shields, and for
all manner of goodly vessels;
27. riches and honour] Compare 2 Kings xx. 13 (= Isaiah xxxix.
2).

shields] Hebrew māginnōth, i.e. small round shields. Perhaps,

like Solomon’s (ix. 15, 16), they were overlaid with gold or silver.
Barnes suggested the reading migdānōth, “precious things” (as in
verse 23), instead of māginnōth. LXX. ὁπλοθήκας, i.e. “armouries”;
Peshitṭa (text being doubtful here) “shields” or “pearls” or “precious
gifts.”

²⁸storehouses also for the increase of corn

and wine and oil; and stalls for all manner of
beasts, and flocks in folds.
28. flocks in folds] The “folds” were enclosures with high stone
walls as a defence against robbers and wild beasts. The text is
probably faulty; Peshitṭa omits the clause.

²⁹Moreover he provided him cities, and

possessions of flocks and herds in
abundance: for God had given him very much
substance.
29. cities] The context suggests that these cities were meant
chiefly as places of refuge for the flocks and herds in time of war; but
again it is probable that the text is corrupt, and that this word should
be omitted.

³⁰This same Hezekiah also stopped the upper

spring of the waters of Gihon, and brought
them straight down on the west side of the city