Este reporte fue elaborado por Oswaldo Ruiz-Chiriboga.
En el ultimo número de la Revista Human Rights Law Review (vol. 16(2), 2012), Damian A. González Salzberg publicó el artículo “Do Preliminary Objections Truly Object to the Jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights? An Empirical Study of the Use and Abuse of Preliminary Objections in the Court’s Case Law”. Este es el resumen del artículo:
“Preliminary objections are a frequent first defence used by Defendant States before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Despite this, the topic remains largely unexplored by legal authors. This article will conduct a systematic empirical analysis of all preliminary objections that the Court has examined during its 25 years of existence. Drawing on the analysis of primary data, the article will illustrate how the Court has actually dealt with 246 preliminary objections presented by the Defendant States. The purpose of the article is to use empirical evidence in order to identify those preliminary objections that are generally admitted by the Court, thus proving to be a valid defence; as well as those that are not successful, raising the question of the reasons behind their use by States.”