Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Ángela Poma Poma v. Peru
Transcript of Ángela Poma Poma v. Peru
The author and her family own a farm in the district of Palca, Tacna Region, Peru, where they raise alpacas, llamas and other smaller animals.
Since 1950s, water-diversion and well-drilling projects by the government of Peru and some companies in
resulted in gradual drying out of the wetlands where
practiced llama-raising in accordance with the traditional way of life for thousands of years.
The author complained to the Human Rights Committee that Peru violated
Whether the water diversion operations which cause degradation of the author's land violated her rights under Art. 27 of the Covenant.
What are the nature and scope of the right enshrined under Art. 27.
Whether the State party has denied the author the right to an effective remedy for the violation of her rights under Article 2(3)(a) in conjunction with Art. 27
Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:
To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;
In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.
The activities carried out by Peru violated the right of the author to enjoy her own culture together with the other members of her group, in accordance with Article 27 of the Covenant.
Peru has denied the author the right to an effective remedy for the violation of her rights recognized in the Covenant, as provided for in Article 2(3)(a) read in conjunction with Article 27.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The press and the public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for reasons of morals, public order (ordre public) or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice; but any judgement rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law shall be made public except where the interest of juvenile persons otherwise requires or the proceedings concern matrimonial disputes or the guardianship of children.