<p>Canadian courts have struggled to develop a consistent and coherent approach for reviewing administrative decision-making. In particular, they have been unable to create a workable framework that will guide when the courts will show deference to administrative tribunal interpretations of law and when they will interfere with them, leading to a system of administrative law that is unpredictable and disorderly. This thesis develops a novel approach to administrative review centered on a conception of judicial due-deference that is correlated with a Razian account of legitimate authority. My argument is that administrative review is best understood as an exercise of inter-institutional decision-making in which diverse institutions within the meta-institution of government must work together to arrive at decisions that best secure government objectives. When reviewing courts recognize that administrative actors are better situated in particular circumstances to make decisions than the courts, they ought to show deference. On the other hand, when courts are better situated to handle these matters, deference is not to be shown. I begin in Part I by analyzing the history of Canadian administrative law jurisprudence through to the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in <em>Dunsmuir</em>, highlighting the competing principles of the rule of law and democracy that animate the ‘Diceyan Dialectic’. In Part II, I articulate a complex theory of inter-institutional reasoning that demonstrates the important role of deference and authority in good government decision-making. In Part III, I apply this model to the circumstances of Canadian administrative review. I show how there are certain institutional strengths, as well as key limitations, with respect to how our superior courts can play a role in upholding the Rule of Law and democracy. Ultimately, I argue that the superior courts must pay attention to the unique institutional placement of administrative actors relative to them in order to discern if these non-curial actors possess greater authority and hence ought to be shown deference.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Le droit international pénal est né de l'engagement de la responsabilité pénale individuelle des principaux criminels de la Seconde guerre mondiale. Aux Tribunaux de Nuremberg et de Tokyo, ont succédé dans les années 1990 les deux juridictions ad hoc pour l'ex-Yougoslavie et le Rwanda, créées par le Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies, avant l'avènement d'une juridiction indépendante, permanente et à vocation universelle en 1998 : la Cour pénale internationale. Parmi les actes sous-jacents constitutifs de crimes de guerre, de crimes contre l'humanité et de génocide, une constante apparaît : l'intégrité physique et mentale. En l'absence de définition uniforme dans les systèmes juridiques nationaux, cette notion se définit sur la base des dispositions statutaires et se précise grâce à la jurisprudence des juridictions internationales pénales. Érigeant un véritable droit à l'intégrité physique et mentale en matière de génocide et de crimes de guerre, la jurisprudence des Tribunaux ad hoc utilise également la notion pour compléter la liste des actes sous-jacents constitutifs de crimes contre l'humanité et définir d'autres infractions. Les Chambres vont même jusqu'à protéger cette intégrité en dehors de toute incrimination. Car au-delà de l'intégrité physique et mentale des victimes se pose la question de l'intégrité physique et mentale des autres acteurs impliqués dans les conflits et les procès : soldats et personnel humanitaire, témoins, accusés.L'étude du droit à l'intégrité physique et mentale dans la jurisprudence internationale pénale permet de constater l'émergence d'un droit inconnu des systèmes juridiques nationaux en tant que tel. Ce droit soulève des questions de sécurité juridique tout en démontrant l'autonomie du droit international pénal / The roots of international criminal law may be found in the individual criminal liability of the major criminals of the Second World War. The Nuremberg and Tokyo International Military Tribunals were followed in the 1990's by the two ad hoc Tribunals for Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, created by the United Nations Security Council, and then in 1998 by an independant and permanent tribunal with a universal vocation : the International Criminal Court. Among the underlying acts of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, a leitmotif stands out : physical and mental integrity. Without a uniform definition in national legal systems, this notion is defined on the basis of statutory provisions and becomes clear in the international criminal tribunals' case law. Establishing an autonomous right to physical and mental integrity in terms of genocide and war crimes, the case law of ad hoc tribunals alsouses the notion to complete the liste of underlying acts of crimes against humanity and to define some other crimes. Chambers are also protecting this integrity without any incrimination. Because beyond physical and mental integrity of victimes, arises the question of the physical and mental integrity of other actors of conflicts and proceedings : soldiers, humanitarian workers, witnesses and accused.Studying the right to physical and mental integrity in international criminal case law uncovers the emergence of a right unknown to national legal systems as such. This right raises questions of legal certainty as much as demonstrates the autonomy of international criminal law.

This limited scope dissertation deals with the protection against torture in international law. The mechanisms which have been established over the years to protect individuals against torture are analysed. The principles of international customary law dealing with torture and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) have been examined against the failure by States to honour their obligations under the Treaty and other legal normative rules. This required deep exploration of the definition of torture and how States can compromise the rule of law by manipulating the definition of torture as contemplated by the Treaty or other instruments. Examples from the former US government highlight the ways in which domestic laws can be used and are continued to be used to allow the use of torture. Measures by South Africa in joining the international community in the fight against torture are also discussed as a case study. While all efforts have been made by the South African system to adopt desirable frame works on the protection of individuals against torture, the lack of education on torture remains the down fall of the system. The dissertation clearly explains that universal jurisdiction applies in respect of torture and this is recognised by both treaty law and customary law. Indeed despite all the current measures in place the use of torture persists. The research clearly reveals that countries hide behind their own laws to perpetrate acts of torture. It is then recommended that proper implementation of the legal structures, informed of the objectives of the structures, is essential in completely eradicating torture. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLM

À une époque où l'immigration internationale est de plus en plus difficile et sélective, le statut de réfugié constitue un bien public précieux qui permet à certains non-citoyens l'accès et l'appartenance au pays hôte. Reposant sur le jugement discrétionnaire du décideur, le statut de réfugié n’est accordé qu’aux demandeurs qui établissent une crainte bien fondée de persécution en cas de retour dans leur pays d'origine. Au Canada, le plus important tribunal administratif indépendant, la Commission de l'immigration et du statut de réfugié du Canada (CISR), est chargé d’entendre les demandeurs d'asile et de rendre des décisions de statut de réfugié. Cette thèse cherche à comprendre les disparités dans le taux d’octroi du statut de réfugié entre les décideurs de la CISR qui sont politiquement nommés. Au regard du manque de recherches empiriques sur la manière avec laquelle le Canada alloue les possibilités d’entrée et le statut juridique pour les non-citoyens, il était nécessaire de lever le voile sur le fonctionnement de l’administration sur cette question. En explorant la prise de décision relative aux réfugiés à partir d'une perspective de Street Level Bureaucracy Theory (SLBT) et une méthodologie ethnographique qui combine l'observation directe, les entretiens semi-structurés et l'analyse de documents, l'étude a d'abord cherché à comprendre si la variation dans le taux d’octroi du statut était le résultat de différences dans les pratiques et le raisonnement discrétionnaires du décideur et ensuite à retracer les facteurs organisationnels qui alimentent les différences. Dans la lignée des travaux de SLBT qui documentent la façon dont la situation de travail structure la discrétion et l’importance des perceptions individuelles dans la prise de décision, cette étude met en exergue les différences de fond parmi les décideurs concernant les routines de travail, la conception des demandeurs d’asile, et la meilleure façon de mener leur travail. L’analyse montre comment les décideurs appliquent différentes approches lors des audiences, allant de l’interrogatoire rigide à l’entrevue plus flexible. En dépit des contraintes organisationnelles qui pèsent sur les décideurs pour accroître la cohérence et l’efficacité, l’importance de l’évaluation de la crédibilité ainsi que l’invisibilité de l’espace de décision laissent suffisamment de marge pour l’exercice d’un pouvoir discrétionnaire. Même dans les environnements comme les tribunaux administratifs où la surabondance des règles limite fortement la discrétion, la prise de décision est loin d’être synonyme d’adhésion aux principes de neutralité et hiérarchie. La discrétion est plutôt imbriquée dans le contexte de routines d'interaction, de la situation de travail, de l’adhésion aux règles et du droit. Même dans les organisations qui institutionnalisent et uniformisent la formation et communiquent de façon claire leurs demandes aux décideurs, le caractère discrétionnaire de la décision est par la nature difficile, voire impossible, à contrôler et discipliner. Lorsqu'ils sont confrontés à l'ambiguïté des objectifs et aux exigences qui s’opposent à leur pouvoir discrétionnaire, les décideurs réinterprètent la définition de leur travail et banalisent leurs pratiques. Ils formulent une routine de rencontre qui est acceptable sur le plan organisationnel pour évaluer les demandeurs face à eux. Cette thèse montre comment les demandeurs, leurs témoignages et leurs preuves sont traités d’une manière inégale et comment ces traitements se répercutent sur la décision des réfugiés. / In an era where international immigration is increasingly difficult and selective, refugee status constitutes a valuable public good that enables some non-citizens access and membership to the host country. Based on the discretionary judgment of the decision-maker, refugee status is only granted to claimants who establish well-founded fear of persecution if returned to their home country. Canada’s largest independent administrative tribunal, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB), is charged to hear refugee claimants and make refugee status determinations. This dissertation investigates why significant disparities exist among IRB’s politically appointed decision-makers’ refugee status grant rates. As little was known about the concrete ways Canada allocates opportunities for entry and legal status for non-citizens, lifting the blanket of administration was necessary. By exploring refugee decision-making from a Street Level Bureaucracy Theory (SLBT) perspective, and an ethnographic methodology that combined direct observation, semi-structured interviews and document analysis, the study sought first to understand whether the variation in grant rates were a result of differences in decision-makers’ discretionary practices and reasoning and second to trace the organizational factors that foster variation. In line with previous scholarship on SLBT that document how the work situation structure discretion and how individual views play in decision-making; this study demonstrates substantive differences among decision-makers in terms of their work routines, conceptions of refugee claimants and the best way to conduct their work. The analysis illustrates how decision-makers apply not a singular but a variety of approaches to the refugee hearing, ranging from rigid interrogation to the more resilient interview style. Despite clear organizational constraints on decision-makers that target to increase consistency and efficiency of refugee determinations, the significance of credibility-assessment and the invisibility of the decision-making space leave ample room for discretionary behavior. Even in rule-saturated environments like administrative tribunals which extensively regulate discretion; decision-making hardly means neutral and hierarchical rule adherence. Instead discretion is nested within the context of interaction routines, work situation, rule adherence and law. It is inherently difficult if not improbable to control and discipline discretionary decision-making even in organizations that institutionalize and standardize training and communicate their demands clearly to decision-makers. When faced with goal ambiguity and with demands that they consider run against their discretionary authority, decision-makers reinterpret their job definition and routinize their practices. They formulate an encounter routine that is organizationally acceptable to assess the people in front of them. This dissertation illustrates how unevenly the claimants, their testimony and evidence are treated and how these treatments are reflected on the refugee decision.

Le Traité sur l’Union Européenne assigne à la Cour de Justice la mission de veiller au respect du droit dans l’application et l’interprétation des traités. A ce titre, elle interprète le droit de l’Union de manière à garantir une application uniforme du droit dans tous les Etats membres. De même, la Cour Commune de Justice et d’Arbitrage (CCJA) est chargée, conformément au Traité relatif à l’Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires (OHADA), d’assurer dans les Etats Parties, l'interprétation et l'application communes du droit uniforme. Ces cours de justice partagent avec les juridictions nationales l’application judiciaire du droit né des traités. Mais les traités n’ont pas réalisé une fusion du système juridictionnel qu’ils ont créé avec celui des Etats membres et, une hiérarchie juridictionnelle n’a pas été établie entre la Cour de justice et les juridictions nationales. Se pose alors la question des moyens par lesquels ces cours de justice arrivent à imposer une application uniforme du droit dans les Etats membres. Après analyse, on relève qu’à travers l’attribution des pouvoirs juridictionnels, les traités ont conféré une autorité supranationale à la Cour de justice européenne et la Cour de justice de l’OHADA. En plus de cette autorité conférée qu’elles ne se contentent pas d’entretenir à l’égard des juridictions nationales, elles génèrent aussi de l’autorité dans le cadre de leur activité juridictionnelle. Ainsi, ces cours œuvrent pour une meilleure intégration régionale. De leur propre gré, elles n’hésitent pas à adopter des positions impérieuses de plus en plus conquérantes. Ce phénomène fait donc évoluer la conception classique des sources de l’autorité de ces cours. La CCJA bénéficie des prérogatives les plus offensives d’origine textuelle, au contraire de la Cour de justice européenne qui, quant à elle, apparaît plus conquérante dans sa jurisprudence. / According to the treaty on the European Union, the Court of justice ensures that, in the interpretation and application of the treaties the law is observed. As such, it interprets EU law to make sure it is applied in the same way in all EU countries. In the same way, the treaty of the Organization for the Harmonization of the Business Law in Africa (OHBLA) has conferred to the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA) the power to rule on, in the contracting states, the interpretation and enforcement of the treaty. Both regional courts share with national courts the power to apply the law resulting from the treaties.But there has not been a fusion of the judicial system of the member states and the community judicial system. No judicial hierarchy has been established between community courts and national courts. This brings the question of by which means the regional courts can enforce the uniform application of the law in the member states. After analysis, it appears that by granting jurisdictional power, the treaties gave a supranational authority to the European Court of Justice and the CCJA. In addition to the power granted to them, the courts also generate authority through their jurisdictional activities. Thus, the courts work for a better integration of the judicial systems by adopting more and more conquering authoritarian positions. This phenomenon has led to a change in the classical conception of the sources of power of the courts. The CCJA enjoys more power from treaties than the European Court of Justice which is more offensive in case law setting.

Die Beilegung von Investitionsstreitigkeit erfolgt innerhalb des ICSID-Systems durch die nicht ständigen und für jeden Fall neu gebildeten ICSID-Schiedsgerichte. Mit Institutionen zur Sicherung der homogenen Entwicklung der Rechtsprechung wie die EG-Generalanwälte, die EG-Vorabentscheidung, das WTO-„Appellate Body“ oder die einem Berufungsverfahren gleichstehende Verweisung an die Große Kammer des EMRGH ist allerdings das ICSID-System nicht ausgestattet. Vielmehr ist die Möglichkeit einer Berufung innerhalb des ICSID-Systems ausdrücklich ausgeschlossen. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird die Homogenität der ICSID-Rechtsprechung geprüft, um festzustellen, ob die Rechtsprechung der für jeden Fall neu gebildeten ICSID-Schiedsgerichte derartige Dissonanzen aufweist, die das ICSID-System reformbedürftig machen. Die Prüfung der Homogenität der ICSID-Rechtsprechung bezieht sich auf die Auslegung von gleichen bzw. ähnlichen Bestimmungen völkerrechtlicher Investitionsschutzabkommen sowie des ICSID-Übereinkommens selbst durch die ICSID-Schiedsgerichte und betrifft im einzelnen die folgenden Themen: (a) Definition des Begriffs „Investition“ im Sinne des ICSID-Übereinkommens. (b) Ausdehnung der Reichweite der Meistbegünstigungsklausel auf Verfahrensvorschriften. (c) Zuständigkeit der ICSID-Schiedsgerichte für reine Verletzungen von Investitionsverträgen mittels weiter Streitbeilegungsvorschriften und Regenschirmklauseln. (d) Standard der Enteignungsentschädigung und Unterscheidung zwischen indirekter Enteignung und staatlicher Regulierung. (e) Völkervertraglicher und völkergewohnheitsrechtlicher Notstand. Die Untersuchung kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass die ICSID-Rechtsprechung an Heterogenität leidet. Dementsprechend bildet der Mangel an Mechanismen zur Sicherung der Homogenität der ICSID-Rechtsprechung ein schwerwiegendes institutionelles Defizit. Es ist daher dringend, dass das ICSID-System unmittelbar reformiert wird, vorzugsweise durch die Schaffung einer ICSID-Berufungsinstanz. / The settlement of investment disputes within the ICSID system is carried out by the ICSID arbitral tribunals which are non-permanent judicial bodies. Every separate case is adjudicated by a different tribunal. The ICSID system, however, does not provide for any institutions similar to the EC Advocate Generals, the EC preliminary rulings, the WTO Appellate Body or to the appeal-like process of the referral to the Grand Chamber of the ECHR capable of securing the homogenous development of the case-law. Moreover, the possibility of appeal of an arbitral award is explicitly excluded within the ICSID system. The present thesis examines the homogeneity of the ICSID jurisprudence in order to ascertain whether the case-law of the separate and not standing ICSID panels proves to be so inconsistent that the ICSID system is in need of reform. The study of the homogeneity of the ICSID jurisprudence concerns the interpretation of identical and similar provisions laid down in international investment treaties as well as of the ICSID Convention itself by the ICSID panels. In particular, it deals with the following topics: (a) Definition of the term “investment” pursuant to the ICSID Convention. (b) Extension of the scope of application of the most-favoured-nation clause to procedural provisions. (c) Jurisdiction of ICSID tribunals over mere violations of an investment contract through broad dispute settlement clauses and umbrella clauses. (d) Standard of compensation for expropriation and distinction between indirect expropriation and state regulation. (e) State of necessity under customary and investment treaty law. This study comes to the conclusion that the ICSID jurisprudence suffers from heterogeneity. Thus, the lack of mechanisms able to secure the consistency of the ICSID case-law constitutes a serious institutional deficit. It is, therefore, urgent to reform the ICSID system immediately, preferably by way of establishing an ICSID appellate authority.

This limited scope dissertation deals with the protection against torture in international law. The mechanisms which have been established over the years to protect individuals against torture are analysed. The principles of international customary law dealing with torture and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) have been examined against the failure by States to honour their obligations under the Treaty and other legal normative rules. This required deep exploration of the definition of torture and how States can compromise the rule of law by manipulating the definition of torture as contemplated by the Treaty or other instruments. Examples from the former US government highlight the ways in which domestic laws can be used and are continued to be used to allow the use of torture. Measures by South Africa in joining the international community in the fight against torture are also discussed as a case study. While all efforts have been made by the South African system to adopt desirable frame works on the protection of individuals against torture, the lack of education on torture remains the down fall of the system. The dissertation clearly explains that universal jurisdiction applies in respect of torture and this is recognised by both treaty law and customary law. Indeed despite all the current measures in place the use of torture persists. The research clearly reveals that countries hide behind their own laws to perpetrate acts of torture. It is then recommended that proper implementation of the legal structures, informed of the objectives of the structures, is essential in completely eradicating torture. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLM

Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. / O trabalho expõe a consolidação do direito à verdade pelo Direito Internacional e a complementaridade entre as comissões da verdade e os tribunais, mecanismos de justiça de transição, como a combinação que melhor lhe confere aplicabilidade. Primeiramente, a tese reivindica que a transição e a consolidação democrática devem se dar por meio da prestação de contas com o passado, o que se torna possível na medida em que se promoveram a partir da 2a Guerra Mundial significativas alterações no Direito Internacional, que se afasta do paradigma vesfaliano de soberania. Aborda-se assim o excepcional desenvolvimento do Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos, do Direito Internacional Humanitário e do Direito Penal Internacional, centralizados na ideia de responsabilidade. A tese também abrange o desenvolvimento do direito à verdade no seio da Organização das Nações Unidas e dos sistemas regionais de proteção de direitos humanos, tendo alcançado o status de norma imperativa ou peremptória, sendo explorados os obstáculos ao seu exercício como no caso de anistias e outras medidas similiares como a prescrição, a justiça militar e a coisa julgada. Enfrentam-se, ainda, as potencialidades e limites da verdade que resulta de comissões da verdade e dos tribunais, concebida esta como conhecimento sobre os fatos e o reconhecimento da responsabilidade pelo ocorrido. O trabalho aborda temas como a independência e imparcialidade das comissões de verdade, seus poderes e o alcance de suas conclusões e recomendações. Por sua vez, com vistas a identificar as verdades a serem alcançadas pelos tribunais, privilegia-se o processo criminal, por se entender que a sentença penal pressupõe o exercício mais completo do devido processo. A imperatividade do direito à verdade é também demonstrada pela defesa da participação da vítima no processo criminal e da admissão de culpa por parte do acusado -- ambos consagrados pelo Tratado de Roma. Por fim, a tese analisa alguns cenários para a complementaridade entre estes dois mecanismos de justiça de transição, fazendo o estudo dos casos do Chile, Peru, Serra Leoa e Quênia, casos estes permeados pelo Direito Internacional, seja pela influência da jurisdição universal ou pelo impacto da jurisdição internacional. O caso brasileiro, por certo, não se ajusta a nenhum destes cenários. Sua caracterização como um diálogo em aberto, para efeitos deste trabalho, pressupõe que o Brasil encontra-se em um importante momento de decisão sobre a complementaridade entre comissões da verdade e tribunais - a recente aprovação da Comissão Nacional da Verdade deve conviver com o aparente conflito entre a decisão do Supremo Tribunal Federal, que afirmou a constitucionalidade da Lei de Anistia de 1979, e a decisão da Corte Interamericana no caso Araguaia, que entende nulos os dispositivos da lei que obstaculizam o processamento dos responsáveis, ambas no ano de 2010 - com a oportunidade de demonstrar que a passagem do tempo não arrefece as obrigações a que se comprometeu no cenário internacional. / The dissertation exposes the consolidation of the right to truth by international law and the complementarity of truth commissions and tribunals, both transitional justice mechanisms, as the combination that better confers its aplicability. First, the work claims that transition to and consolidation of democracy should provide accountability for past abuses, what became possible by the changes that have impacted international law after the World War II. The exceptional development of international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law is explored, considered the idea of responsability. The dissertation takes care of the development of the right to truth within the United Nations Organization and the human rights regional systems, and its status of imperative or peremptory norm, as well the obstacles for its exercise in the case of amnesties and other similar measures as statute of limitation, military justice and doble jeopardy (res judicata). The truth that results from truth commissions and tribunais its potentialities and limits are here conceived as knowledge e acknowledgment of what occured. The work also considers aspects as the independence and impartiality of truth commissions, its powers and the reach of its conclusions and recommendations. On the other hand, considering the truth to be obtained by tribunals, the dissertation priviledges the analysis of criminal procedure, in the sense that a criminal veridict implies due process. The imperativity of the right to truth is also demonstrated by the participation of victims in the criminal procedure and the admission of guilty by the accused both celebrated by the Statute of Rome. The dissertation also covers some sceneries of complementarity between truth commissions and tribunals, making use of the case of Chile, Peru, Sierra Leone and Kenya, cases that suffered significant impact by international law, considered the influence of universal jurisdiction or the impact of international jurisdiction. The Brazilian case, at the end, does not fit precisely in any of these sceneries. Its caracterization as an open dialogue assumes that the country has come face to face with the debate of complementarity the recent approval of the National Truth Commission has to live together with the apparent conflict between two decisions held in 2010: the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the 1979 Amnesty Law and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the Araguaia Case that considered null and void the parts of the law that obstacle the criminal persecution of the ones responsible -, and has opportunity to demonstrate that time has not moderated the obligations to which Brasil has compromised with in the international arena.

No description available.

Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. / O trabalho expõe a consolidação do direito à verdade pelo Direito Internacional e a complementaridade entre as comissões da verdade e os tribunais, mecanismos de justiça de transição, como a combinação que melhor lhe confere aplicabilidade. Primeiramente, a tese reivindica que a transição e a consolidação democrática devem se dar por meio da prestação de contas com o passado, o que se torna possível na medida em que se promoveram a partir da 2a Guerra Mundial significativas alterações no Direito Internacional, que se afasta do paradigma vesfaliano de soberania. Aborda-se assim o excepcional desenvolvimento do Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos, do Direito Internacional Humanitário e do Direito Penal Internacional, centralizados na ideia de responsabilidade. A tese também abrange o desenvolvimento do direito à verdade no seio da Organização das Nações Unidas e dos sistemas regionais de proteção de direitos humanos, tendo alcançado o status de norma imperativa ou peremptória, sendo explorados os obstáculos ao seu exercício como no caso de anistias e outras medidas similiares como a prescrição, a justiça militar e a coisa julgada. Enfrentam-se, ainda, as potencialidades e limites da verdade que resulta de comissões da verdade e dos tribunais, concebida esta como conhecimento sobre os fatos e o reconhecimento da responsabilidade pelo ocorrido. O trabalho aborda temas como a independência e imparcialidade das comissões de verdade, seus poderes e o alcance de suas conclusões e recomendações. Por sua vez, com vistas a identificar as verdades a serem alcançadas pelos tribunais, privilegia-se o processo criminal, por se entender que a sentença penal pressupõe o exercício mais completo do devido processo. A imperatividade do direito à verdade é também demonstrada pela defesa da participação da vítima no processo criminal e da admissão de culpa por parte do acusado -- ambos consagrados pelo Tratado de Roma. Por fim, a tese analisa alguns cenários para a complementaridade entre estes dois mecanismos de justiça de transição, fazendo o estudo dos casos do Chile, Peru, Serra Leoa e Quênia, casos estes permeados pelo Direito Internacional, seja pela influência da jurisdição universal ou pelo impacto da jurisdição internacional. O caso brasileiro, por certo, não se ajusta a nenhum destes cenários. Sua caracterização como um diálogo em aberto, para efeitos deste trabalho, pressupõe que o Brasil encontra-se em um importante momento de decisão sobre a complementaridade entre comissões da verdade e tribunais - a recente aprovação da Comissão Nacional da Verdade deve conviver com o aparente conflito entre a decisão do Supremo Tribunal Federal, que afirmou a constitucionalidade da Lei de Anistia de 1979, e a decisão da Corte Interamericana no caso Araguaia, que entende nulos os dispositivos da lei que obstaculizam o processamento dos responsáveis, ambas no ano de 2010 - com a oportunidade de demonstrar que a passagem do tempo não arrefece as obrigações a que se comprometeu no cenário internacional. / The dissertation exposes the consolidation of the right to truth by international law and the complementarity of truth commissions and tribunals, both transitional justice mechanisms, as the combination that better confers its aplicability. First, the work claims that transition to and consolidation of democracy should provide accountability for past abuses, what became possible by the changes that have impacted international law after the World War II. The exceptional development of international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law is explored, considered the idea of responsability. The dissertation takes care of the development of the right to truth within the United Nations Organization and the human rights regional systems, and its status of imperative or peremptory norm, as well the obstacles for its exercise in the case of amnesties and other similar measures as statute of limitation, military justice and doble jeopardy (res judicata). The truth that results from truth commissions and tribunais its potentialities and limits are here conceived as knowledge e acknowledgment of what occured. The work also considers aspects as the independence and impartiality of truth commissions, its powers and the reach of its conclusions and recommendations. On the other hand, considering the truth to be obtained by tribunals, the dissertation priviledges the analysis of criminal procedure, in the sense that a criminal veridict implies due process. The imperativity of the right to truth is also demonstrated by the participation of victims in the criminal procedure and the admission of guilty by the accused both celebrated by the Statute of Rome. The dissertation also covers some sceneries of complementarity between truth commissions and tribunals, making use of the case of Chile, Peru, Sierra Leone and Kenya, cases that suffered significant impact by international law, considered the influence of universal jurisdiction or the impact of international jurisdiction. The Brazilian case, at the end, does not fit precisely in any of these sceneries. Its caracterization as an open dialogue assumes that the country has come face to face with the debate of complementarity the recent approval of the National Truth Commission has to live together with the apparent conflict between two decisions held in 2010: the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the 1979 Amnesty Law and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the Araguaia Case that considered null and void the parts of the law that obstacle the criminal persecution of the ones responsible -, and has opportunity to demonstrate that time has not moderated the obligations to which Brasil has compromised with in the international arena.