Dignity According to the Subject. Three Possible Meanings in Conventionality Control

Authors

  • Helga María Lell Conicet, Universidad Nacional de La Pampa (Argentina) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7703-6341

    Investigadora adjunta de Conicet y profesora titular de Filosofía del Derecho en la Universidad Nacional de La Pampa (UNLPam), Santa Rosa (Argentina). Doctora en Derecho por la Universidad Austral (Argentina); especialista y magíster en Estudios Sociales y Culturales por la UNLPam; y magíster en Filosofía por la Universidad Nacional de Quilmes (Argentina).
    Código ORCID: 0000-0001-7703-6341. Correo electrónico: helgalell@conicet.gov.ar

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202102.008

Keywords:

Dignity, Subject, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Concept, Semantics

Abstract

This paper presents three categories in which the notion of dignity can be used in jurisprudence, depending on the subject to which it is ascribed: as institutional status, as a characteristic of the human being and as a characterization of other elements. In each one of the types, in the first place, a theoretical explanation is made that, although brief, tries to introduce some characteristics about the respective meaning. Second, it describes how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has used the term «dignity» in the respective sense; that is, a review of the casuistry is included. Finally, some ideas are discussed. The methodology has been analytical regarding the use of the concept and is based on an analysis of the contentious cases and the
advisory opinions of the mentioned institution.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2021-11-25

How to Cite

Lell, H. M. (2021). Dignity According to the Subject. Three Possible Meanings in Conventionality Control. Derecho PUCP, (87), 273–307. https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202102.008