DOCSLIB.ORG

Ariela Peralta Distéfano

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ariela Peralta Distéfano Ariela Peralta Distéfano I. EDUCATION DEGREES LL.M Master of Laws in International Legal Studies American University (Washington College of Law) Washington, D.C., U.S. 2005 Transitional Justice and Human Rights Accountability Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship Program American University (Washington College of Law) Washington, D.C., U.S. 2005 Public Notary (Escribana Pública) Universidad de la República, Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales, (Law School) Montevideo, Uruguay 1990 Juris Doctor (Abogada) Universidad de la República, Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales, (Law School) Montevideo, Uruguay 1987 Procurator (Procurador) Universidad de la República, Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales, (Law School) Montevideo, Uruguay 1985 LANGUAGES Spanish: Native speaker English: Fluent in reading, writing and speaking (advanced) Portuguese: Oral and reading comprehension Italian: Oral and reading comprehension French: Basic knowledge II. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Institute of Public Policies on Human Rights (IPPDH), MERCOSUR Executive Secretary Buenos Aires, Argentina 2020-Present *The Executive Secretary is the institutional representative of the Institute of Public Policies on Human Rights (IPPDH) of the MERCOSUR, responsible for the fulfillment of the tasks attributed to the Institute and for its technical, administrative, financial and patrimonial management. The ES is a national of one of the States Parties, designated by the Common Market Group (GMC), on the proposal by the High Level Human Rights Authorities Meeting (RAADH), being members of MERCOSUR: Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The objective of the IPPDH is to contribute to the strengthening of the Rule of Law in the States Parties through the designing and monitoring of public policies on human rights for the consolidation of human rights as a fundamental core of the identity and development of MERCOSUR. Organization of American States (OAS) Office of the Secretary of Legal Affairs Consultant Washington, D.C., U.S. 2018-2019 1-Ariela Peralta Distéfano National Human Rights Institution and Ombudsperson Office (NHRI or INDDHH) President Uruguay 2016-2017 National Human Rights Institution and Ombudsperson Office (NHRI or INDDHH) Board of Directors, Director Uruguay 2012-2017 *The National Human Rights Institution and Ombudsman Office (Institución Nacional de Derechos Humanos y Defensoría del Pueblo – INDHH-) created by law in 2008 is directed by a Board of five members elected by Congress majority. It was established in 2012, in accordance with the Paris Principles, as an independent and autonomous body of the State conducting its tasks and decisions. Created with a broad mandate, the NHRI helps the community to interact with government agencies, addresses complaints of human rights violation, and issues recommendations for the compliance by the State agencies, performs investigations and inspections (providing recommendations), provides advice and guidance to Government agencies, offers training to the public sector agencies, conducts outreach activities, works closely with international counterparts, oversees the compliance of international human rights legal framework at the domestic level, contributes to implement observations and recommendations of the human rights treaty bodies and of the special procedures of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The INDDHH in Uruguay also acts as the National Preventive Mechanism of Torture (according to UN/ OPCAT), supervising the conditions of deprivation of liberty. As a member of its first Board of Directors and as President of the INDDHH, my responsibilities included personally addressing complaints and issuing recommendations, as well as of monitoring the compliance, coordinating actions with the political system and State agencies and with civil society, presenting reports for the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and at the human rights treaty bodies and special procedures of the UN Human Rights Council, following up on State’s reports and public policy on human rights, representing the INDDHH at the national and international levels. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO) Academic Director Post Graduate Degree: “Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law” Uruguay 2014-2017 Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) Deputy Executive Director Washington D.C., U.S. 2006-2012 *As second in command, the Deputy Executive Director oversees all of CEJIL’s areas of work, working in tandem with the Executive Director to decide which cases to bring to the Inter-American Commission and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, seeking redress for the victims and changes on legislations or States policies to reverse the violations that occurred. As Deputy Executive Director, I led and directed the legal representation of numerous cases and thematic hearings at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. CEJIL together with more than 400 partner organizations represents more than 10,000 victims and beneficiaries of protective measures in more than 300 cases before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. CEJIL has consultative status before the OAS and the United Nations (UN), and observer status before the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights. Examples of Notable Cases Litigated: * I/A Court H.R., Case of Uzcátegui et al. v. Venezuela. Merits and reparations. Judgment of September 3, 2012. Series C No. 249. * I/A Court H.R., Case of Gonzalez Medina and Family v. Dominican Republic. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 27, 2012. Series C No. 240. * I/A Court H.R., Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2011. Series C No. 237. * I/A Court H.R., Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221. * I/A Court H.R., Case of Gomes Lund et al. ("Guerrilha do Araguaia") v. Brazil. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2010. Series C No. 219. 2-Ariela Peralta Distéfano * I/A Court H.R., Case of Anzualdo-Castro v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 22, 2009. Series C No. 202. * I/A Court H.R., Case of the Rochela Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 163. * I/A Court H.R., Case of La Cantuta v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 29, 2006. Series C No. 162. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Development Program National Consultant on Human Rights and Legislative Policy Montevideo, Uruguay 2005 * The UNDP and the OHCHR carried on the Project: “Asistencia Técnica al Parlamento de Uruguay” (URU/04/010), (“Proyecto de Asistencia Técnica”). The general objective of the Project was to assist the Uruguayan Congress to enforce its capacity to respond efficiently to the challenges that a modern Parliament faces as well as enhance its role in the promotion and protection of human rights. Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT) Programmer Officer for the Americas Geneva, Switzerland 2004 Service of Peace and Justice, NGO (SERPAJ) Director of Civil and Political Rights Department Montevideo, Uruguay 1994-2004 Service of Peace and Justice- Latin America (SERPAJ-AL) Executive Secretary Montevideo, Uruguay 1998-2002 * SERPAJ: Latin America Latina has consultative status with the UN in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). “Life and Education” NGO Alternative Programs for Incarcerated Young Children’s Attorney Montevideo, Uruguay 1996-1998 Uruguay Bar Association Center of Promotion for the Rights of Children and Adolescents Attorney Montevideo, Uruguay 1996-1998 Private Practice Attorney and Notary, Extensive pro-bono work Montevideo, Uruguay 1998-2004 In 2017, I was nominated by the Uruguayan Executive Branch as the Uruguayan candidate to serve as judge of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the 2018-2027 mandate. https://parlamento.gub.uy/noticiasyeventos/noticias/node/86871 ; https://parlamento.gub.uy/noticiasyeventos/noticias/node/86870 The following is the Report of the Advisory Committee on Nominations of Judges of the ICC, October 10, 2017, to the Assembly of States Parties ICC-ASP/16/7, with its positive assessment of the candidate Dr. Peralta, can be read in the following link: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP16/ICC-ASP-16-7-ENG.pdf 3-Ariela Peralta Distéfano III. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE, THROUGH APPOINTMENTS, FELLOWSHIPS AND PARTICIPATION UPON SPECIAL INVITATIONS CERTIFICATES Regional Seminar for Latin American Members of the Parliamentarian Commissions of Human Rights The OHCHR Regional Office for South America, School of Government, House of Representatives, Legislative Branch, Colonia del Sacramento, Uruguay 2015 Forum: State Terrorism Trials. Dialogues between the Academy, Social Organizations and the State [Original Title: Juicios al Terrorismo de Estado. Diálogos entre la Academia, las Organizaciones Sociales y el Estado] Facultad de Psicología, Facultad de Derecho y Observatorio Luz Ibarburu,Montevideo, Uruguay 2015 Seminar Raphael Lemkin, Genocide and Mass Atrocities Prevention Latin America Network, the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation Santiago de Chile, Chile 2015 Mandela Dialogues on Memory
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Distillerweb, Job 2
    INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE GB.286/LILS/4/1 286th Session Governing Body Geneva, March 2003 Committee on Legal Issues and International Labour Standards LILS FOURTH ITEM ON THE AGENDA Other legal issues (a) Cooperation Agreement between the International Labour Organization and the Latin-American Parliament (PARLATINO) 1. The Director-General has received a letter from Senator Juan Adolfo Singer, member of the Senate of Uruguay and President of the Latin-American Parliament (PARLATINO) proposing the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the ILO and PARLATINO. 2. The Latin-American Parliament (PARLATINO) was established in 1964 by parliamentarians from 14 countries of Latin America. It was institutionalized by international Treaty in 1987 by 18 American States. Its members are national parliaments of the region and are represented by pluralist parliamentary delegations. At present, there are 22 countries and territories whose parliaments are members of PARLATINO: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela; Aruba and the Dutch Antilles are also members. Its headquarters are located in Sao Paulo (Brazil). The principles on which its action is based are the defence of democracy, Latin-American integration, the political self-determination of member States and respect for the precepts of international law in conformity with the United Nations Charter. Among the objectives it pursues are the promotion of the integrated economic, social, political and cultural development of Latin America, the defence of freedom, social justice and economic independence and the fight against any form of colonialism, racism or attack upon human dignity.
    [Show full text]
  • Groupe Des Femmes Parlementaires Des Amériques
    Group of Women Parliamentarians of the Americas Second Regional Forum (Central and South America) “Women’s Leadership to Strengthen Democratic Governance” Buenos Aires, Argentina – April 6 – 8, 2005 Chamber of Deputies Dr. Juan Carlos Pugliese Annex 25 Riobamba, Room 1, 2nd floor, Suite 227 Buenos Aires Objectives: . To build the capacity of parliamentarians to promote and implement gender- equity policies, through the sharing of experiences and best practices . To assess the advancement of women thus far and identify key growth areas and tools for their participation in leadership and decision-making . To submit recommendations to the Plenary Assembly of FIPA, with a view to the Fourth Summit of the Americas (Mar del Plata, Argentina, November 4 and 5, 2005) on “Creating Employment to Confront Poverty and Strengthen Democratic Governance” Contacts: Canada Argentina FIPA Technical Secretariat: Office of Deputy Margarita Stolbizer: Emmanuelle Pelletier or Sabra Ripley Evangelina Gutkin Tel.: 1 (613) 947-8787 Tel.: (54) 11 6310-7247 Fax: 1 (613) 947-8010 Fax: (54) 11 6310-7818 [email protected] [email protected] Program Wednesday, April 6, 2005 Arrival of participants. 6:00 pm Welcoming cocktail, Dining Room of the Dr. Juan Carlos Pugliese Annex to the Chamber of Deputies. 25 Riobamba 25, 5th floor § Opening remarks from the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, Mr. Eduardo Oscar Camaño Thursday, April 7, 2005 9:00 am Registration of participants 10:00 am Opening ceremony . Deputy Margarita Stolbizer, Chair of FIPA’s Group of Women Parliamentarians . Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette, President of FIPA . Deputy Luis Molinari Romero, Member of FIPA’s Executive Committee .
    [Show full text]
  • LA SACRALIZACIÓN DEL CONSENSO NACIONAL Y LAS PUGNAS POR LA MEMORIA HISTÓRICA Y LA JUSTICIA EN EL URUGUAY POSDICTATORIAL América Latina Hoy, Vol
    América Latina Hoy ISSN: 1130-2887 [email protected] Universidad de Salamanca España RONIGER, Luis LA SACRALIZACIÓN DEL CONSENSO NACIONAL y LAS PUGNAS POR LA MEMORIA HISTÓRICA y LA JUSTICIA EN EL URUGUAY POSDICTATORIAL América Latina Hoy, vol. 61, agosto, 2012, pp. 51-78 Universidad de Salamanca Salamanca, España Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=30824379003 Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto LA SACRALIZACIóN DEL CONSENSO NACIONAL y LAS PUGNAS POR LA MEMORIA HIStóRICA y LA jUStICIA EN EL URUGUAy POSDICtAtORIAL The Sanctification of National Consensus and Struggles over Historical Memory and Justice in Post-Dictatorial Uruguay Luis RONIGER Wake Forest University, Estados Unidos * [email protected] BIBLID [1130-2887 (2012) 61, 51-78] Fecha de recepción: 24 de enero del 2012 Fecha de aceptación: 19 de junio del 2012 RESUMEN: Este trabajo se propone analizar el peso relativo de los poderes institucionales y la sociedad civil dentro de la constelación de fuerzas que bregaron por definir políticas de jus - ticia transicional y configurar la memoria histórica de la sociedad uruguaya y que, en una larga serie de parciales intentos, eventualmente abrieron nuevos espacios de institucionalidad para el establecimiento tardío de responsabilidad legal y rendición de cuentas por las violaciones a los derechos humanos cometidas en el Uruguay en el marco de la Guerra Fría. Palabras clave : justicia transicional, memoria histórica, derechos humanos, impunidad y ren - dición de cuentas.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2016 Pga Annual Table of Contents Report 2016 1
    WWW.PGACTION.ORG ANNUAL REPORT 2016 PGA ANNUAL TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT 2016 1. PGA SECRETARY GENERAL’S MESSAGE 02 PARLIAMENTARIANS FOR GLOBAL ACTION 2. ABOUT PGA 03 3. OVERVIEW OF PGA MEMBERSHIP 04 4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE & INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL 09 5. PGA SECRETARIAT 10 6. UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE 11 7. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROGRAMME 12 8. PEACE AND DEMOCRACY PROGRAMME 17 9. GENDER, EQUALITY AND POPULATION PROGRAMME 20 10. 2016 IN REVIEW 23 11. 2016 PARTNERS AND DONORS 24 PGA SECRETARY-GENERAL’S MESSAGE Dear PGA Friends, The year 2016 was defined by numerous achievements by Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA), the largest non-governmental2016 organization of individual legislators committed to human rights and the Rule of Law, democracy, human security, non-discrimination and gender equality, with approximately 1400 members in 143 Parliaments around the world. We are delighted to share with you our efforts towards a more equitable, just and peaceful world, with growth and progress in each of our three programmes: Peace and Democracy, International Law and Human Rights, and Gender, Equality and Population. PGA successfully completed year one of our 2016- 18 strategic plan and gained 223 new PGA member-parliamentarians representing all regions of the world. In December, PGA convened the largest political gathering of Legislators on the fight against impunity, the 2016 PGA Annual Forum and 9th Consultative Assembly of Parliamentarians for the International Criminal Court & the Rule of Law (CAP-ICC) in Dakar, Senegal. The meeting occurred at an opportune time as the ICC is facing new threats as some African countries are moving to withdraw from the Court and provided a platform for the ICC Prosecutor and President and Parliamentarians from Africa and other regions of the world to address concerns and reaffirm political support for the Rome Statute system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Plata Basin Example
    Volume 30 Issue 1 Winter 1990 Winter 1990 Risk Perception in International River Basin Managemnt: The Plata Basin Example Jorge O. Trevin J. C. Day Recommended Citation Jorge O. Trevin & J. C. Day, Risk Perception in International River Basin Managemnt: The Plata Basin Example, 30 Nat. Resources J. 87 (1990). Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nrj/vol30/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resources Journal by an authorized editor of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. JORGE 0. TREVIN* and J.C. DAY** Risk Perception in International River Basin Management: The Plata Basin Example*** ABSTRACT Perceptionof the risk of multilateralcooperation has affected joint internationalaction for the integrateddevelopment of the PlataRiver Basin. The originsof sovereignty concerns amongArgentina,Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay are explored in terms of their his- torical roots. The role of risk in determining the character of the PlataBasin Treaty, and the ways in which risk was managedin order to reach cooperative agreements, are analyzed. The treaty incor- porates a number of risk management devices that were necessary to achieve internationalcooperation. The institutional system im- plemented under the treaty producedfew concrete results for almost two decades. Within the currentfavorable political environment in the basin, however, the structure already in place reopens the pos- sibility of further rapid integrative steps. INTRODUCTION Joint water development actions among the five states sharing the Plata Basin-Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay-have been dominated by two factors: the enormous potential benefits of cooperation, and long-standing international rivalries.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States and the Uruguayan Cold War, 1963-1976
    ABSTRACT SUBVERTING DEMOCRACY, PRODUCING TERROR: THE UNITED STATES AND THE URUGUAYAN COLD WAR, 1963-1976 In the early 1960s, Uruguay was a beacon of democracy in the Americas. Ten years later, repression and torture were everyday occurrences and by 1973, a military dictatorship had taken power. The unexpected descent into dictatorship is the subject of this thesis. By analyzing US government documents, many of which have been recently declassified, I examine the role of the US government in funding, training, and supporting the Uruguayan repressive apparatus during these trying years. Matthew Ford May 2015 SUBVERTING DEMOCRACY, PRODUCING TERROR: THE UNITED STATES AND THE URUGUAYAN COLD WAR, 1963-1976 by Matthew Ford A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History in the College of Social Sciences California State University, Fresno May 2015 APPROVED For the Department of History: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree. Matthew Ford Thesis Author Maria Lopes (Chair) History William Skuban History Lori Clune History For the University Graduate Committee: Dean, Division of Graduate Studies AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER’S THESIS X I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in its entirety without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of authorship. Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must be obtained from me.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy in the Age of Pandemic – Fair Vote UK Report June 2020
    Democracy in the Age of Pandemic How to Safeguard Elections & Ensure Government Continuity APPENDICES fairvote.uk Published June 2020 Appendix 1 - 86 1 Written Evidence, Responses to Online Questionnaire During the preparation of this report, Fair Vote UK conducted a call for written evidence through an online questionnaire. The questionnaire was open to all members of the public. This document contains the unedited responses from that survey. The names and organisations for each entry have been included in the interest of transparency. The text of the questionnaire is found below. It indicates which question each response corresponds to. Name Organisation (if applicable) Question 1: What weaknesses in democratic processes has Covid-19 highlighted? Question 2: Are you aware of any good articles/publications/studies on this subject? Or of any countries/regions that have put in place mediating practices that insulate it from the social distancing effects of Covid-19? Question 3: Do you have any ideas on how to address democratic shortcomings exposed by the impact of Covid-19? Appendix 1 - 86 2 Appendix 1 Name S. Holledge Organisation Question 1 Techno-phobia? Question 2 Estonia's e-society Question 3 Use technology and don't be frightened by it 2 Appendix 1 - 86 3 Appendix 2 Name S. Page Organisation Yes for EU (Scotland) Question 1 The Westminster Parliament is not fit for purpose Question 2 Scottish Parliament Question 3 Use the internet and electronic voting 3 Appendix 1 - 86 4 Appendix 3 Name J. Sanders Organisation emergency legislation without scrutiny removing civil liberties railroading powers through for example changes to mental health act that impact on individual rights (A) Question 1 I live in Wales, and commend Mark Drakeford for his quick response to the crisis by enabling the Assembly to continue to meet and debate online Question 2 no, not until you asked.
    [Show full text]
  • The Administrative and Financial Autonomy of Parliamentary Assemblies
    The administrative and financial autonomy of parliamentary assemblies Report prepared by Mr Michel Couderc (France), adopted at the Moscow Session (September 1998) The autonomy of parliamentary assemblies is a question which one might describe as "cross-disciplinary" since it touches on all aspects of the organisation and functioning of parliaments. Even when limited to its administrative and financial dimensions, the question might seem too broad and as a result to elicit responses which are too general to be relevant. In fact the reverse is the case. I sincerely thank my fifty-two colleagues (Annex 1) for the quality and detail of their responses. This embarrassment of riches has led me to present a first report which will be at the same time both overfull and inevitably incomplete . I would therefore ask everyone to forgive me if they do not find an analytical discussion of their own response. Apart from in the Tables, I have only mentioned in particular the Assemblies which conveyed a viewpoint with especial clarity on some aspect of the problem or those which were an exception to the majority of responses. Autonomy is not therefore an "empty shell" but a concrete reality which expresses in some way and to various degrees depending on the country, the shared specificity of the parliamentary phenomenon throughout the world. This is not surprising since autonomy is defined in effect by on the one hand non- dependence and non-subordination of Assemblies in relation to the Executive, and, on the other, by the possibility of the Assembly freeing itself at least partially from the rules of ordinary law so as to follow instead its own regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parliamentary System of Romania Sources Off Information for Parliament the Recent Constitutional Reforms in France
    UNION TNTERPARLEMENTAIRE INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION ASSOCIATION DES SECRETAIRES GENERAUX DES PARLEMENTS ASSOCIATION OF SECRETARIES GENERAL OF PARLIAMENTS O CONS TITUTIONAL AND PARLIAMENTARY INFORMATION o The parliamentary system of Romania Sources off information for Parliament The recent Constitutional reforms in France No. 171 - 1st Half-year 1996/ASGP Review INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION Aims The Inter-Parliamentary Union whose international Statute is outlined in a Headquarters Agreement drawn up with the Swiss federal authorities, is the only world-wide organization of Parliaments. The aim of the Inter-Parliamentary Union is to promote personal contacts between mem- bers of all Parliaments and to unite them in common action to secure and maintain the full participation of their respective States in the firm establishment and development of repre- sentative institutions and in the advancement of the work of international peace and co- operation, particularly by supporting the objectives of the United Nations. In pursuance of this objective, the Union makes known its views on all international problems suitable for settlement by parliamentary action and puts forward suggestions for the development of parliamentary assemblies so as to improve the working of those institutions and increase their prestige. Membership of the Union (May 1996) Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d'lvoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea (Dem.
    [Show full text]
  • Christianity and the Struggle for Human Rights in the Uruguayan Laïcité
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ASU Digital Repository Dynamic Secularisms: Christianity and the Struggle for Human Rights in the Uruguayan Laïcité by Lucía Cash MA Thesis presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts Approved April 2015 by the Graduate Supervisory Committee: Linell Cady, Chair Christopher Duncan Daniel Schugurensky Carolyn Warner ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY May, 2015 ABSTRACT From 1973 to 1984 the people of Uruguay lived under a repressive military dictatorship. During that time, the Uruguayan government violated the Human Rights of its opponents and critics through prolonged imprisonment in inhumane conditions without trial, physical and psychological torture, disappearance, and a negation of freedom of speech, thought and congregation. In this project, I argue that these violations of Human Rights committed by the military dictatorship added urgency to the rethinking by religious individuals of the Uruguayan model of secularism, the laïcité, and the role that their theology required them to play in the “secular” world. Influenced by the Liberation Theology movement, Catholic and Protestant leaders simultaneously made use of and challenged the secularization model in order to carve a space for themselves in the struggle for the protection of Human Rights. Furthermore, I will argue that due to the Uruguayan system of partitocracy, which privileges political parties as the main voices in public matters, Uruguay still carries this history of Human Rights violations on its back. Had alternative views been heard in the public sphere, this thorny history might have been dealt with in a fairer manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Discursive Processes of Intergenerational Transmission of Recent History Also by Mariana Achugar
    Discursive Processes of Intergenerational Transmission of Recent History Also by Mariana Achugar WHAT WE REMEMBER: The Construction of Memory in Military Discourse (2008) ‘Mariana Achugar has written a powerful and solid book in which she gives voice to new generations of Uruguayan youth from Montevideo and rural Tacuarembó, who enter the public debate about the contested traumatic past of recent dictatorship. As Mariana emphasizes in her work, “the goal of intergenerational transmission of the recent past is not only to remember, but to understand”, and this is precisely what youth manifested to be interested in, because understanding their past enables them to construct their national and civic identities. Mariana expands the theoretical and methodological approaches in discourse analysis and focuses on the circulation and reception of texts. She exam- ines intertextuality and resemiotization in recontextualized practices, for analyzing what youth know about the dictatorship and how they learn about it. In doing so, Mariana reveals the complexity of this cir- culation of meanings about the past through popular culture, family conversations and history classroom interactions in school contexts. We learn that the youth, as active members of society, construct the past of the dictatorship through both; schematic narratives that are avail- able in the public sphere, and from their own elaborations grounded on the materials available in the community. This is a highly relevant and much needed book for scholars interested in memory and critical discourse studies.’ – Teresa Oteíza, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile ‘Memory scholars agree that the inter-generational transmission of col- lective memories is key to shaping the future, and others have noted that Uruguay is in the vanguard of using the school to transmit historical memories of the recent past to children who did not live it themselves, but no one has studied this process so closely or so well as Mariana Achugar .
    [Show full text]
  • CASE GELMAN V. URUGUAY
    INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE GELMAN v. URUGUAY JUDGMENT OF FEBRUARY 24, 2011 (Merits and Reparations) The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court,” “the Court,” or “the Tribunal”): Composed of the following judges: Diego García-Sayán, President; Leonardo A. Franco, Vice-President; Manuel E. Ventura Robles, Judge; Margarette May Macaulay, Judge; Rhadys Abreu Blondet, Judge; and Eduardo Vio Grossi, Judge also present: Pablo Saavedra Alessandri, Secretary, and Emilia Segares Rodríguez, Deputy Secretary, pursuant with Articles 62(3) and 63(1) of the American Convention of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”) and with Articles 31, 32, 34, 62, 64, 65 and 67 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court1 (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”), orders the present Judgment in the case of Juan Gelman, María Claudia García Iruretagoyena de Gelman and María Macarena Gelman García Iruretagoyena with the Eastern Republic of Uruguay (hereinafter "the State" or "Uruguay"), denominated “Gelman v. Uruguay.” Pursuant to Article 19(1) of the Inter-American Court Rules of Procedure in the present case (infra note 1), that establish that: “[i]n the cases referred to in Article 44 of the Convention, a Judge who is a national of the respondent State shall not be able to participate in the hearing and deliberation of the case.” Judge Alberto Pérez Pérez, of Uruguayan nationality, recused himself from participating in the processing and deliberation of this case and and signing of this Judgment. 1 The Court Rules of Procedure applied in the present case are those approved in the LXXXV Regular Period of Sessions held on November 16 and 18, 2009, and that came into force on January 1, 2010, pursuant to that approved in Article 78 therein.
    [Show full text]