Abstract
Since 2006, Latin American lawyers and authorities have faced a new challenge in the exercise of power to invalidate laws and normative acts: the control of conventionality. Although the majority literature has received this innovation extremely positively, there are several inconsistencies and inconsistencies of this instrument. This is what this paper seeks to demonstrate and problematize. Based on a descriptive and normative method, it will be demonstrated that such a control instrument is unfounded. This generates conceptual problems, since there is no possibility of applying a normative sanction through the judgment of convention, which removes the idea of normative control. The adoption of this instrument also creates serious procedural and sanctioning problems in the legal systems of States. Finally, identifying the activist decisions of the Inter-American Court is one more factor contrary to the control of conventionality.
Keywords:
International Law; Comparative Law; control of conventionality; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; criticism