Professor elected head of human rights group
By KIFLIN TURNER
News Writer
Once a political prisoner in his native country and now a progressive leader working to preserve universal human rights, Juan Mendez, professor of law and director of the Center for Civil and Human Rights at Notre Dame, was elected president of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) marking a new chapter of Mendez's life-long commitment as an advocate of human rights.
His impressive record of investigating human rights violations began when Mendez began representing political prisoners under the military dictatorship of Argentina when he was to become a victim himself of governmental persecution. Mendez was tortured and imprisoned for more than a year before he was expelled from his homeland.
"When I came to the States I started at the beginning, trying to work on behalf of friends that have been left behind in custody who disappeared and then that turned into a professional career," said Mendez
Mendez began his 15-year career at the Human Rights Watch and eventually worked on its general counsel in 1994, where he helped to establish it as the world's leading private organization monitoring human rights violations. A year later, he became executive director of the IACHR in Costa Rica from 1996 to 1999 and served as the Commission's vice president.
And now as president-elect of the IACHR, Mendez admitted that his accomplished position will pose a challenge, but he's ready for all that his title entails.
"I think it's a great challenge having a complicated year — with the challenge of terrorism and the United States' responses to it, but also the turmoil and the interruptions of democracy in Venezuela — and that means that the Inter-American Commission is called upon to offer solutions on a short-term basis," said Mendez.
When asked about his decision to commit his life's work to investigating human rights issues, Mendez preferred to regard his work as more of a rewarding opportunity rather than a job that demanded great obligations and responsibilities.
"I actually think it's a privilege — I've been very blessed at the possibility of working full time on human rights," said Mendez. "I don't think it's any sacrifice, on the contrary, it's like being given a pass to do what you want to do," he said.
Established by the charter of the Organization of American States, the Commission hears complaints filed by individuals against any one of the member states that belong to the OAS. The case is then processed under procedure after the Commission makes a decision in favor of the petitioner or of the state.
The case then goes on to the Inter-American Court of Human rights where the Court passes judgment on the laws of the country in relation to its compatibility and inconsistency with human rights violations, according to Mendez.
"We educate civil society as to how to defend their own rights," said Mendez. "We try to disseminate the doctrine of human rights and try to educate the people as to how they should apply human rights terms in their daily work," he said.
The Commission also dedicates its energy to investigating specific issues concerning women, children, indigenous peoples and prisoners. Mendez noted that his current area of concentration is focused on migrant issues.
Mendez identified reforms regarding financial funding as being necessary to improving the effectiveness of the internal system of the Commission and the Court.
He cited that the OAS budget allots less that 4 percent in human rights protection.
"At this point we have an incredible amount of work and really pathetic levels of support so we could function a lot better if we could convince the states to put the put the money where their mouth is," said Mendez. "In spite of those meager resources we are constantly called upon to work on very difficult cases to protect those who cannot protect themselves," he said.
Along with an increase in monetary support, Mendez also pointed to reforming the potentially problematic structure of the Commission and the Court as an organization without a binding legal force to implement its decisions.
"It's not only a matter of money, it's also a political commitment by the states to back the decisions of the Commission and the Court," said Mendez. The Commission derives its authority from its decisions that serve as recommendations.
States are obligated to follow the decision, but compliance often resides on the pressure of the international community to carry out the judgment.
"Also, dealing with effectiveness is to find a mechanism that which if a state decides not to comply with our recommendations and the decisions of the Court, that there would be effective measures enforcing them," said Mendez.
Political commitment on the part of the states is the major component in continuing to recognize the authority of the Commission and the Court, Mendez said.
"Right now, fortunately we don't have a great problem with non-compliance. Countries by and large abide by what we say they should do," he said. "I think if we could come up with a better system of monetary compliance with the decisions of the Court and the Commission with a similar system in Europe then it works much better."
Protecting the freedom of expression by enforcing the democracy clause of the convention is a primary goal of the Commission said Mendez.
"Countries not only have to respect human rights, but they have to organize themselves in a way that goes hand in hand with respect to human rights — and that's democracy," said Mendez. "Suspensions of democracy are a human right violations in and of themselves," he said.
All News Stories for Wednesday, April 17, 2002
