The Right to Water in the Case-Law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The human right to water is nowadays more broadly recognised, mainly due to the essential societal function that this resource plays; likewise, because of the present water scarcity is generating conflicts between its different uses. Thus, this right aims at protecting human beings by guaranteeing access to clean water that is essential to satisfy vital human needs. Similarly, access to clean water is an important element to guarantee other rights including the right to life and health. The recognition of the right to water is mainly achieved in two ways: as a new and independent right and as a subordinate or derivative right. Concerning the latter, the right to water can emanate from civil and political rights, such as the right to life; or can be derived from economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to health, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to housing. This contribution explores the position of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding the right to water, and analyses whether the Court has recognised the right to water and, if so, in which manner.

Fundamental Right to Freedom of Conscience without Objection? Some Notes for its Recognition as a Fundamental Guarantee

Conscientious objection is defined as the ability to depart from statutory mandates because of intimate convictions based on ethical or religious convictions. A discussion of this issue presents the conflict between the idea of a State concerned with the promotion of individual rights or the protection of general interests and an idea of law based on the maintenance of order and against a view of the law as a means to claim the protection of minimum conditions of the person. From this conflict is drawn the possibility to argue whether conscientious objection should be guaranteed as a fundamental right of freedom of conscience or as a statutory authority legislatively conferred upon persons. This paper sets out a discussion around the two views so as to develop a position that is more consistent with the context of social and constitutional law.

Sustainable Development and the Right to Water in Colombia

Water, considered as an environmental resource and as an economic and social good, should be part of the Colombian public agenda, not only not only in terms of the use and preservation of hydro resources, but also in terms of the social implications of its possession and use. The world wide preoccupation with the diminution of natural resources, species extinction and water shortage has its origins in the seventies. One of the results was the establishment of international conventions and agreements to achieve responsible management of natural resources. Regarding water as a resource, it is intrinsically bound to the Earth’s natural processes and ecosystems. As regards the Colombian case, the “right to water in Colombia” is analyzed taking into account: water as an integral part of sustainable development, the right to water as a global debate and, finally, the right to water in the Colombian context within the explanatory framework of the Water Referendum.

Historical perspective of the Psychology of motivation

The psychology of motivation has a long tradition and history in psychology. In fact, we consider that, to a certain extent, understanding the history of the psychology of motivation is understanding great part of which has been psychology itself, since the main target of psychology was, and is, to try to explain behaviour, and the aim of psychology of motivation is to find out the causes of behaviour. In its long passage to the present time, there have been three perspectives that have monopolized most of the investigation: the biological, the behavioural and the cognitive. They are not excluding. Each one of them has been predominant in certain stages, although the same attention was paid to the other two. Nowadays, the biological and cognitive perspectives are those that receive greater attention from the investigators. The historical direction in the study of the psychology of motivation represents an important solution to know how the events that have given rise to the present consideration about the psychology of motivation were forged. To know the past helps us to understand the present, at the same time it allows us to hypothesise with great probability of success which will be the future in the study object.

The project of land restitution in Colombia: an illustration of the civilizing force of hypocrisy?

This article offers a theoretical interpretation of the dispositions on land restitution contained in the famous “Victims’ Bill”, which was debated in the Colombian Congress during the year 2008. The bill included specific mechanisms aimed at guaranteeing the restitution of land to victims of the Colombian armed conflict. At the time, the bill was endorsed by all the main political actors in the country –notably the government and the elites that support it, on the one hand, and victims’ and human rights organizations and other opposition groups, on the other–. The fact that the restitution of land to victims of the Colombian armed conflict was being considered as a serious possibility by all political actors in the country seemed to indicate the existence of a consensus among actors whose positions are ordinarily opposed, on an issue that has traditionally led to high levels of polarization. This consensus is quite puzzling, because it seems to be at odds with the interests and/or the conceptions of justice advocated by these political actors, and because the restitution of land faces enormous difficulties both from a factual and a normative point of view, which indicates that it may not necessarily be the best alternative for dealing with the issue of land distribution in Colombia. This article offers an interpretation of said consensus, arguing that it is only an apparent consensus in which the actors are actually misrepresenting their interests and conceptions of justice, while at the same time adopting divergent strategies of implementation aimed at fulfilling their true interests. Nevertheless, the article concludes that the common adherence by all actors to the principle of restorative justice might bring about its actual realization, and thus produce an outcome that, in spite (and perhaps even because) of being unintended, might substantively contribute to solving the problem of unequal land distribution in Colombia. Even though the article focuses in some detail on the specificities of the 2008 Bill, it attempts to make a general argument about the state of the discussion on how to deal with the issue of land distribution in the country. Consequently, it may still be relevant today, especially considering that a new Bill on land restitution is currently being discussed in Congress, which includes the same restitution goals as the Victims’ Bill and many of its procedural and substantive details, and which therefore seems to reflect a similar consensus to the one analyzed in the article.