Abstract
This article explores how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights applies pecuniary and non-pecuniary reparations judgments in an effort to compel States to comply with the duty of prevention and non-repetition as embodied in Article 1 of the American Convention of Human Rights. Using Peru as a case study, the author argues that such judgments fail to induce States to guarantee internal domestic remedies, the mechanism used by citizens to check State compliance with the international duty to protect human rights, including the right to reparation, thus creating victim reliance on the Court for redress. In conclusion, the author proposes that the Court begin to use punitive measures in order to compel States to begin erecting internal remedies at home and thus strengthening domestic protection of human rights.