性別與暴力：美洲人權法院對中美洲「殺女」論述之回應

Gender and Violence: Response of the Inter–American Court of Human Rights to the Feminicide Discourse in Central America

「殺女」概念於中美洲發展為對抗不對等性別權力關係之重要論述，進而挑戰法律規範之不足。殺女非僅強調被害人性別，更指控社會與法律體制對女性生命尊嚴之結構性暴力或系統性歧視，構成其與國際人權法之連結。殺女揭露體制之加害：私人對女性之殘害不受懲罰，無異於國家及其代理人與加害人共同構成殺女網絡。惟自整體既有之國際人權法規範觀察，對婦女施加之暴力已得涵蓋殺女，無論自基於性別之加害動機或自相應之國家義務範疇而論。況殺女論述亦得以禁止歧視搭配生命權及禁止侮辱待遇條款課責相關義務。向以拉丁美洲新憲政主義著稱之美洲人權法院，於2009年訴墨西哥及2014年訴瓜地馬拉兩項判決中確認，國家面對基於性別之謀殺須滿足盡其所能義務。公權力機關忽視性別權力關係甚至將罪行歸咎被害人等行為，徒然釋放殺女不受懲罰之錯誤訊息。美洲人權法院首度超越美洲人權公約而直接適用1994年貝倫公約（BelémdoParáConvention），惟未如婦運之期待般肯定殺女概念並納入美洲人權規範加以發展。本文主張，美洲人權法院雖慣於直接指導各國應有作為，惟亦著重毫無爭議之法規範適用，使性別歧視面向依舊與既有人權規範相融，以維持其整合式合公約性審查方針。

The concept of ''feminicide'' has been developed into a key discourse to confront the unbalanced gender relations and then the unsatisfying legal norms in Central America. Feminicide does not only underline the victims' gender but also accuses social and legal systems of structural discrimination or systematic violence against women's life and dignity, which constitutes its connection with the international human rights law. It exposes how the system's failure in protection has made the private abuse of women unpunished, in which the state and its agents become part of the feminicide complicity network. However, when observed from the existing norms under international human rights law, feminicide can be covered by the notion of violence against women, whether concerning the killing motive or the extent to which state obligations to protect are met. Moreover, the same state accountability can also be established under the right to life and the prohibition of degrading treatments in the light of nondiscrimination. Known for its Latin American constitutionalism, the Inter- American Court of Human Rights confirmed in its judgments on Mexico (2009) and Guatemala (2014) that states have to fulfill due diligence obligations regarding ''gender-based murders''. Public authorities, by neglecting the gender power relationship and even imputing the tragedies to the victims for their behaviors, send a wrong message to ensure the impunity of feminicide crimes. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, for the first time, went beyond the American Convention on Human Rights and apply directly the 1994 Belém do Pará Convention, without nevertheless recognized and develop the elimination of feminicide as part of the Inter-American human rights legal framework. I argue that, although the Court does not refrain itself from intervening directly in the way that national authorities implement the norms, it still relies on an undisputed application of conventionality. Its two judgments on feminicide crime aim at maintaining gender discrimination as an fundamental part of the existing legal system, so as to reinforce its integration approach on conventionality control.