A/HRC/28/82 the damage suffered and corresponding compensation, identify those responsible and halt the epidemic, among other actions. 82. With regard to the issue of statelessness, the Independent Expert is following closely the progress of talks between the Haitian and Dominican authorities. He had hoped to meet with the Minister for Haitians Living Abroad, but that was not possible during the mission in July 2014. 83. In October 2014, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights made public its judgement of 28 August 2014 in which it found Judgement TC/0168/13 of the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic to be in violation of the American Convention on Human Rights. According to Judgement TC/0168/13, which had been issued one year earlier, all persons born in the Dominican Republic after 1929 of parents who were foreign nationals were deemed illegal aliens and did not have the right to Dominican nationality. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights rejected the Dominican court’s decision, thus confirming the position taken by several other international bodies, including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UNICEF, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, who had declared that this decision was not in conformity with international obligations (A/HRC/25/71, para. 79). 84. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights concluded that Judgement TC/0168/13, given its general scope, did not comply with the obligation assumed under article 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights to adopt national legislation with regard to the rights — recognized in the Convention — to juridical personality (art. 3), to a name (art. 18) and to nationality (art. 20) and, in connection with those rights, the right to identity and the right to equal protection under the law (art. 24); it also failed to respect the obligations set forth in article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention.21 The Dominican Republic was thus obligated to take action within a reasonable time frame to ensure that the aforementioned acts cease to have any legal force or effect.22 85. The Inter-American Court accordingly ordered the Dominican Government to take all necessary steps, within a reasonable time frame, so that Judgement TC/0168/13 and the provisions of articles 6, 8 and 11 of Act No. 169-14 would cease to have legal force and effect, pursuant to paragraph 468 of the judgement. 23 86. This finding of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights should have provided the necessary basis for action by the Haitian Government vis-à-vis the Dominican authorities to ensure the protection of the rights of persons of Haitian origin living in the Dominican Republic. Regrettably, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Dominican Republic issued an opinion stating its disagreement with the decision of the Inter-American Court and declaring, on 4 November 2014, the unconstitutionality of the instrument acknowledging the competence of the Inter-American Court that had been signed by the President of the Dominican Republic on 19 February 1999.24 This could mean an eventual repudiation by that country of the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the human rights protection system built around the American Convention on Human Rights. 21 22 23 24 16 Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Case of Expelled Dominicans and Haitians v. Dominican Republic, judgement of 28 August 2014 (Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs), Series C 282, para. 325. Available (in Spanish only) at http://corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_282 _esp.pdf (consulted 26 January 2015). Ibid., para. 468. Ibid., para. 512, point 18 of the judgement. Dominican Republic, Constitutional Tribunal, Judgement TC/0256/14, 4 November 2014. Available (in Spanish only) at www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.do/sites/default/files/documentos/Sentencia%20 TC%200256-14%20C.pdf (consulted 26 January 2015). GE.15-02042