A sentença e o silêncio, entre o papel e a pele, o grito que a corte não ouve: a (in)efetividade das decisões da corte interamericana de direitos humanos sobre discriminação racial

Abstract

This study critically analyzes the (in)effectiveness of the decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in cases of racial discrimination, highlighting the gap between international legal recognition and the concrete transformations required to confront structural racism in the Americas. Based on documentary analysis and bibliographic review, the research examines racism as an organizing element of social relations and the ambiguous role of law, which can both denounce and reproduce inequalities. It then analyzes the functioning of the Court as a space for listening and accountability, problematizing the limits of its rulings in the face of bureaucratic compliance, lack of political will, and the persistence of institutional racism. As an empirical axis, the study examines emblematic cases, with emphasis on Simone Diniz v. Brazil, Favela Nova Brasília v. Brazil, and Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz v. Honduras, revealing patterns of violation, insufficient state responses, and the tendency for decisions to become mere echoes when not accompanied by public policies, structural reforms, and social oversight. Finally, the paper argues that advocacy networks, transnational legal activism, and social mobilization expand the possibilities of effectiveness by pressuring the State and transforming judgments into practice. It concludes that effectiveness depends less on the wording of decisions and more on the collective capacity to impose listening, memory, and reparation in lived reality.