Las referencias recíprocas entre el Tribunal Europeo y la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos: ¿de la influencia al diálogo?

The article aims to analyze the mutual references made in their judgments by the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-american Court of Human Rights. Previous studies on circulation of foreign precedents have been showing that the use of foreign or «extra-systemic» precedents is not a phenomenon limited to national courts, but does also affect international courts. Nontheless, the notion of «judicial dialogue» is often abused, and the interactions between courts are hardly proved through empirical data but rather through seldom examples. The article presents the results of a general and systemic research on the case-law of the two courts in the period between 1987 and 2012, to verify if there is some kind of «judicial dialogue» or «cross-fertilization» between the two systems. The research follows the methodology previously applied in empirical studies on the use of foreign precedents by constitutional courts, which consists of both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis. The research did not show any evidence of the existence of a real «dialogue» between the two courts, but rather of a «convergence» among their jurisprudence in several fields.El artículo intenta aclarar los resultados de una investigación empírica sobre las referencias o citas recíprocas entre el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) y la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (Corte IDH), reconocibles en la motivación de sus resoluciones. Muchos estudios han destacado que el uso de precedentes extranjeros (o «extrasistémicos») no se limita a los Tribunales nacionales, sino afecta también a los Tribunales internacionales. Sin embargo, es frecuente un abuso de la apelación al «diálogo judicial» para estas prácticas: además, faltan datos empíricos completos y normalmente se encuentran algunos ejemplos bastante casuales.El artìculo presenta los resultados de una investigaciòn extensa y completa sobre las decisiones de los dos Tribunales en los años 1987-2012, para verificar si verdaderamente hay algún diálogo entre los dos sistemas. La investigaciòn sigue el metodo ya experimentado en estudios empíricos sobre el uso de precedentes extranjeros para los tribunales constitucionales, que está integrado al mismo tiempo para un análisis cuantitativo y cualitativo. La investigación no muestra evidencias de un verdadero diálogo entre las dos instituciones, sino de una convergencia jurisprudencial en varias materias.The article aims to analyze the mutual references made in their judgments by the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-american Court of Human Rights.Previous studies on circulation of foreign precedents have been showing that the use of foreign or «extra-systemic» precedents is not a phenomenon limited to national courts, but does also affect international courts. Nontheless, the notion of «judicial dialogue» is often abused, and the interactions between courts are hardly proved through empirical data but rather through seldom examples.The article presents the results of a general and systemic research on the case-law of the two courts in the period between 1987 and 2012, to verify if there is some kind of «judicial dialogue» or «cross-fertilization» between the two systems. The research follows the methodology previously applied in empirical studies on the use of foreign precedents by constitutional courts, which consists of both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis.The research did not show any evidence of the existence of a real «dialogue» between the two courts, but rather of a «convergence» among their jurisprudence in several fields