ABSTRACT

This article discusses the dialogue between the Supreme Courts of Argentina, Brazil and Mexico and the Constitutional Court of Colombia with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. It assesses the impact of the following variables on this judicial dialogue: the hierarchy and direct effect of human rights treaties, consistent interpretation with international law and judicial postures related to international law. The article develops an analysis of each court’s leading cases and discusses whether and how these variables have contributed to dialogue and whether it is possible to identify common patterns in these four countries’ relations with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). We argue that the constitutional status of human rights treaties, the use of the American Convention on Human Rights to control the conventionality of domestic law, the application of the principle of consistent interpretation and a posture of convergence or engagement with international law lead domestic courts to acknowledge an obligation to follow or, at least, consider IACtHR jurisprudence.

中文翻译：

---

国家法院与美洲人权法院之间的司法对话：阿根廷，巴西，哥伦比亚和墨西哥的比较研究

摘要

本文讨论了阿根廷，巴西和墨西哥的最高法院与哥伦比亚宪法法院与美洲人权法院之间的对话。它评估了以下变量对该司法对话的影响：人权条约的等级和直接影响，与国际法的一致解释以及与国际法有关的司法立场。本文对每个法院的主要案件进行了分析，并讨论了这些变量是否以及如何促进对话，以及是否有可能确定这四个国家与美洲人权法院（IACtHR）的关系中的共同模式。我们认为，人权条约的宪法地位，