The impact of Amicus Curiae on International Jurisprudence: The case Córdoba et al. v. Paraguay

Abstract

This article analyzes the application of amicus curiae in the case of Córdoba v. Paraguay, decided by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) in 2023. This ruling, the first of its kind issued by the Court regarding international child abduction, addresses the complex interaction between the rights of parents and children in the context of cross-border unlawful transfers. It is based on frameworks such as the Hague Convention and the Inter-American Convention on the International Return of Children. The role of the amicus curiae is highlighted for its contribution to incorporating diverse perspectives and advancing international human rights law, thereby strengthening the legitimacy and transparency of international judicial processes. The methodology used is a qualitative case study, complemented by doctrinal and jurisprudential analysis. The study is structured around a review of the theoretical framework and the implications of amicus curiae in the international context, followed by a detailed examination of the Córdoba v. Paraguay case and an analysis of the specific influence of this figure in the Court's judicial deliberation. Through this case analysis, the article evaluates how the amicus curiae submitted by the International Child Abduction Centre (Reunite) and the Human Rights Clinic of the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile influenced the Court’s decision, strengthening the protection of the right to family life and state obligations in cases of international child abduction. The Court’s ruling found the Paraguayan State internationally responsible for violating various rights to the detriment of the father, highlighting the significant impact of the amicus curiae in the judicial deliberation.