74 2011 Quebec Journal of International Law (Special Edition) have the option to request the Court’s opinion concerning the compatibility of national legislation with the Convention or with other human rights treaties. 56 The Court interprets the notion of “ national legislation” in the widest possible sense and indicates that the concept refers to all types of legal norms, including constitutional measures. 57 It emphasizes that government bills and constitutional reform bills may also be subject to requests relating to their compatibility with the American

Convention and other human rights treaties. 58 To support this position, the Court highlights that its consultative function should be viewed as a type of service offered by the Court which should benefit all Inter-American actors and whose ultimate aim is to support States in order to ensure that they respect their international human rights obligations. It considers that too strict an interpretation of the notion of “ national legislation” as mentioned in Article 64(2), understood as “ legislation currently in place” would, in some cases, confine the State to adopting and enforcing legislation which is contrary to the American Convention (which is in itself a violation of the

Convention) and/ or other treaties concerned with human rights before being able to consult the Court on its compatibility59. In order to prevent this type of situation, the Court agrees to deliver opinions on the compatibility of proposed bills or constitutional reforms. A State may also consult the Court on a government bill’s compatibility with its international human rights obligations by formulating the question to fit into Article 64(1) of the American Convention. It must be noted that, though individuals and groups are unable to request consultative opinions, they may nevertheless serve the Inter-American Court of Human Rights an individual petition alleging the incompatibility of a national provision of a State party which has accepted the Court’s adjudicatory competence. The Court will ensure that national law complies with the American Convention in abstracto, as long as the petition identifies a specific potential victim. While this mechanism differs greatly from the consultative function’s philosophy (which, by nature, is non-contentious), it may concern only States which are party to the Convention and which have accepted the Court’s litigious competence, and may only relate to the law’s conformity with the

Convention itself (and not with other treaties set out in Article 64(2) of the

Convention). Ensuring the conformity of a law through adjudicatory means can be

56Article 64 of the American Convention, supra note 2 at para. 2 : “ The Court, at the request of a member State of the Organization, may provide that state with opinions regarding the compatibility of any of its domestic laws with the aforesaid international instruments.” Article 82 of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights : at para. 1 “ A request for an advisory opinion presented pursuant to Article 64(2) of the Convention shall indicate the following : a. the provisions of domestic law and of the Convention or of other treaties concerning the protection of human rights to which the request relates.” OAS, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 85th Sess., Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, OR OEA/ Ser. L/ V/ III. 25 doc. 7 (1992) 18.

57Proposed Amendments of the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica, supra

note 55 at para. 14.

58Ibid. at para. 26-28. See also Compatibility of Draft Legislation with Article 8(2)(h) of the American Convention on Human Rights (1991), Advisory Opinion OC-12/ 91, Inter-Am. Ct. H. R. (Ser. A) No. 12, at para. 20-22, Annual Report of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights : 1991,

OEA/ Ser. L/ V/ III. 25/ doc. 7 (1992) 115. The Inter-American Court distinguished clearly between the term “ legislation” used in Article 64(2) of the Convention, which it interprets widely, and the term “ law” in Article 30 of the Convention where it proposes a particularly strict interpretation.

59Proposed Amendments of the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica, supra

note 55 at para. 18.