The work is focused on the adjudicatory nature of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and investigates its model of deliberation, considering three basic schemes: per curiam, seriatim and hybrid. In order to identify an institutional pattern, the importance of individual opinions is analyzed through the quantitative performance of each category of judge (ad hoc and regular), as well as each type of adjudicative activity (judgments and advisory opinions). The quantitative data is also useful to better understand the explicit assimilation of separate opinions to the core reasoning of future cases. As a result, it has been possible to identify relevant aspects applicable to the main problem of whether individual opinions really matter to the Inter-American Court’s decision-making process.
North Korean defectors are considered citizens of South Korea under the
South Korean Constitution, while others that flee violence gain the legal status of
“refugee.” North Korean defectors, who attempt to escape one of the worst
human rights crises in the world, find themselves in a unique situation. What
benefits does this status have? How are refugees typically treated abroad, such as
in the United States? This Comment will explore this unique status, how it differs
from refugee status in the United States, and the challenges North Korean
defectors face in South Korea.