Search

The American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man is often cited as evidence of the longstanding centrality of human rights in Latin American approaches to international law. However, when the Declaration is brought into the history of inter-American regionalism, a more complex picture emerges. This article places the early codification efforts of regional human rights within the post-war construction of inter-American regional organisation. It argues that for Latin American and US elites, the priorities lay on institutional, collective security, and economic aspects. In this context, they instrumentally embraced the flexible language of human rights to advance broader regionalist visions. As a result, human rights gained ground, albeit as a contested idea. The article reveals that the post-war institutional settlement ultimately comprised a collective security apparatus, crucial for the United States, supplemented by the principle of non-intervention, vital to Latin American states, in which human rights were not central. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the significance of the Bogotá Conference in establishing the Organization of American States (OAS) and shaping inter-American regionalism, highlighting its pivotal role in post-war international relations. Topics include the historical context of Latin American multilateral ambition, the power dynamics among American states, and the diverse normative outcomes of the conference, such as treaties on dispute settlement and women's political rights.

This article examines the work of Mexican diplomat and jurist Jorge Castañeda as an insight into the trajectory of international legal thought in the semi-periphery on international organizations. It argues that Castañeda adopted a distinct approach to international organizations law that foregrounds power asymmetries. The article considers three interventions made by Castañeda that express this semi-peripheral approach and have lasting relevance. First, it shows how, by focusing on the interests of small powers, Castañeda's work in the 1950s departed from functionalist optimism and stressed the tension between rule by international organizations and domestic rule, emphasizing the centrality of the reserved domain and drawing lessons for strategic legal engagement for small powers. Second, this article studies how Castañeda's concern for the cause of small powers shaped his views on regionalism, grounding his critique of Pan-Americanism and his vindication of the United Nations (UN) to attenuate the perils of regionalism. Third, this article retrieves Castañeda's defence of the UN General Assembly as a platform for international law-making, contextualizes it within the rise of decolonization and explores the implications for his earlier sceptical views about the expansion of UN powers. The article concludes by highlighting the significance of the thought of semi-peripheral jurists for any efforts aimed at re-theorizing international organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]