Facts and Norms Institute and UFPE 'Amicus Curiae' Underpins Historic Inter-American Court Decision in the Collen Leite Case

Memorial presented jointly by FNI and the Human Rights Clinic of the Federal University of Pernambuco brought essential arguments on transitional justice, gender perspective, and transgenerational harm that resonated in the ruling against the Brazilian State.

December 11, 2025 – The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) published today the judgment in the case of Leite, Peres Crispim et al. Vs. Brazil, condemning the Brazilian State for the lack of investigation, prosecution, and punishment regarding the arbitrary detention, torture, and extrajudicial execution of Eduardo Collen Leite ("Bacuri"), as well as for the torture suffered by his partner, Denise Peres Crispim, during the military dictatorship.

The decision reflects various legal and sociological arguments presented in the Amicus Curiae Memorial prepared in partnership by the Facts and Norms Institute (FNI) and the Human Rights Clinic of the aSIDH Extension Program at the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE). The document, submitted to the Court during the proceedings, provided crucial technical input that directly and indirectly impacted the Tribunal's reasoning.

Direct Impact: Gender Perspective and Obstetric Torture

One of the points of greatest convergence between the Amicus Curiae and the final judgment was the application of the gender perspective. The FNI/UFPE Memorial dedicated an entire chapter to state violence against women, highlighting the specific vulnerability of Denise Peres Crispim, who was pregnant during the torture sessions.

The Inter-American Court accepted this thesis, explicitly establishing in Operative Paragraph 8 that the State is responsible for the lack of investigation with due diligence and a gender approach regarding the torture suffered by Denise. The judgment acknowledged that the violence was aggravated by her pregnancy, aligning with the Amicus argument that maternity was used as an instrument of psychological and physical torture by the repressive regime.

Transitional Justice and the Amnesty Law

The Amicus Curiae vigorously argued that the Brazilian Amnesty Law (Law No. 6.683/1979) and the statute of limitations could not be used to prevent accountability for crimes against humanity.

The Court's judgment fully ratified this position. The Tribunal declared that the crimes committed against Eduardo and Denise constitute crimes against humanity and are, therefore, imprescriptible. The Court determined that the provisions of the Amnesty Law cannot represent an obstacle to the investigation and punishment of those responsible—a direct victory for the Transitional Justice theses defended by the Institute and the Clinic.

Indirect Impact and Nuances: Transgenerational Harm and Life Project

The Memorial innovated by introducing the concept of "transgenerational violation," focusing on the harm suffered by Eduarda Crispim (daughter of Eduardo and Denise), who was born under State custody and lived in exile, having her right to identity and name violated for decades.

Although the Court technically decided that the violation of the "Right to Identity" (regarding civil registration) ceased in 2009 with the rectification of the certificate domestically, the Tribunal recognized the depth of the harm suffered. The judgment condemned Brazil for the violation of personal integrity and, crucially, for the damage to the "life project" (proyecto de vida) of Denise and Eduarda.

This conceptualization of "damage to the life project" dialogues directly with the thesis of "transgenerational violation" presented in the Amicus. The FNI/UFPE document drew important parallels between the erasure of the identity of political exiles and the cultural erasure of indigenous peoples, providing the Court with a broader context on how the Brazilian State historically uses bureaucracy and oblivion as weapons of repression.

Relevance of Academic Engagement

The participation of the Facts and Norms Institute and aSIDH/UFPE demonstrates the importance of civil society and academia in international strategic litigation. By providing data on contemporary police violence, the insufficiency of reparation policies, and the need for transitional justice that considers gender and race, the institutions helped shape a judgment that not only repairs the victims of the past but establishes clear obligations for the future of Brazilian democracy.

The full judgment and the official summary can be accessed on the IACtHR website.

---

About FNI and aSIDH/UFPE:The Facts and Norms Institute is an independent academic organization dedicated to human rights research. The aSIDH Extension Program at UFPE operates in training and litigation before the Inter-American System.