The final word? Constitutional dialogue and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: A reply to Jorge Contesse

Document Type

Response or Comment

Publication Date

2017

Publication Information

15 ICON-Int'l J. Const. L. 436 (2017).

Abstract

The first part of this reply takes issue with two parts of Contesse's article’s critique of conventionality control, while the second more briefly discusses the idea of judicial dialogue, emphasizing the need to understand this dialogue as a two-way exchange rather than a monologue whose only relevant actor is the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Share

COinS