Integral Repair: Applicable Principles and Repair Modalities
Abstract
The objective of the present investigation is to analyze the integral repair, the principles on which it is based and the models of integral repair. The models of reparation can be applied in the same case, for this reason the evaluation of the damage caused is necessary to apply a specific type of reparation in which restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction measures and guarantees of non-repetition may concur. The methodology used is the synthetic analytical method. The article consists of four sections. The first section develops the introduction of the research work. The second section analyzes comprehensive reparation, its access and consultation with victims of reparations, beneficiaries of reparations, adequate proportional reparations, causality; and, standard and burden of proof. The third section examines the principles on which reparations are based. In the fourth section the models of integral reparation are developed, among them the individual reparation that includes restitution, monetary compensation and rehabilitation; and, in the collective reparation, measures of satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition are studied and it is concluded that comprehensive reparation is a right of the victims recognized in international law, therefore several principles applicable at the time of issuing reparation are recognized. In addition, there are two ways to fully repair the victim, one that is individual and the other that is collective.
Downloads
References
Benavides, J. & Escudero, J. (2013). Manual de justicia constitucional ecuatoriana. Quito: Corte Constitucional del Ecuador, 2013. (Cuadernos de trabajo, 4).
CIDH (2019). Cuadernillo de Jurisprudencia, 14.
CIDH, Acosta Calderón v. Ecuador, Sentencia de 24-VI-2005
CIDH, Bámaca Velasquez v. Guatemala, Sentencia de 22-II-2002.
CIDH, Blake v. Guatemala, Sentencia de 22-I-1999,
CIDH, Cantoral Benavides v. Perú, Sentencia de 3-XII-2001.
CIDH, Caracazo v. Venezuela, Sentencia de 29-VIII-2002.
CIDH, Castillo Páez v. Perú, Sentencia 27-XI- 1998
CIDH, Castillo Petruzzi v. Perú, Sentencia de 30-V-1999
CIDH, De la Masacre de Las Dos Erres v. Guatemala, sentencia de 24-XI- 2009.
CIDH, Las Hermanas Serrano Cruz v. El Salvador, Sentencia de 1-III-2005.
CIDH, Las Niñas Yean y Bosico v. República Dominicana, Sentencia de 8-IX-2005.
CIDH, Las Palmeras v. Colombia, Sentencia de 26 de-XI- de 2002.
CIDH, Loayza Tamayo v. Perú, Sentencia de 27-XI- 1998.
CIDH, Masacres de Ituango v. Colombia, sentencia de 1-VII-2006.
CIDH, Suarez Rosero v. Ecuador, Sentencia de 20-I-1999.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador para el período de transición. Sentencia 002-12/SIS-CC, caso 0021-09-IS, de (05-I-2012).
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia 004-13-SAN-CC, caso 0015-10-AN, de (13-IV-2010).
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia 009-14-SIS-CC, Caso N ° 0081-ll-IS, de (29-I-2014).
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia 031- 15-SIS-CC, Caso Nº 0031-10-IS de (29-IV-2015).
Ecuador, Constitución de la República del Ecuador, Registro Oficial 449, 20-X-2008.
Ecuador, Constitución Política de la República del Ecuador, Registro Oficial 1, 11 de-VIII-de 1998.
Ecuador, Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional, Registro Oficial suplemento 52, 22-X-2009.
Nash Rojas, C. (2009). Las reparaciones ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (1988-2007), 2a ed. Santiago de Chile: Universidad de Chile.
Neuman, Elías. ¨Victimología. El Rol de la Victima en los delitos Convencionales y no Convencionales¨.
ONU (16 de diciembre de 2005). Resolución 60/147. Principios y directrices básicos sobre el derecho de las víctimas de violaciones manifiestas de las normas internacionales de derechos humanos y de violaciones graves del derecho internacional humanitario a interponer recursos y obtener reparaciones.
Copyright (c) 2020 Glenda Granda Torres, Carmen del Cisne Herrera Abrahan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors publishing in our Journal comply to the following terms:
1. Authors keep their work’s copyrights, but they guarantee Ius Humani Law Journal to be the first publisher of their papers. They grant the Journal will a Creative Commons Attribution License, under which their work can be shared with the condition that it is appropriately cited.
2. Authors are aware and accept that the Ius Humani Team will try to give the greatest diffusion to the Journal, which means, among other things, that its printed and electronic editions will be distributed among different databases and scientific indexes.
3. Authors can establish further clauses for non exclusive distribution, such as publication on a separate book or placing in an institutional data-base. Nevertheless, a note should be always added to explain that the paper was originally published in Ius Humani Law Journal.
4. We permit and encourage authors to share their work through Internet before and during the editorial process to receive further recommendations and wider references (we recommend you read the article The Effect of Open Access).
