What approach is used to restrict rights in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR)?

The approach of strict necessity, proportionality, and legitimate aim is foundational in the context of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) for restricting rights. This framework ensures that any limitations placed on human rights must meet specific criteria to be considered justified.

Strict necessity requires that limitations on rights are essential to achieve a legitimate purpose. This means that alternatives that would impinge less on the rights in question must have been adequately considered and ruled out.

Proportionality operates alongside strict necessity, ensuring that the means used to restrict rights are proportionate to the ends being pursued. This principle assesses whether the restriction's benefits outweigh the harm caused to the right being limited.

Lastly, the legitimate aim criterion specifies that any restrictions must serve a purpose recognized as legitimate under international human rights law, such as protecting public order, public health, or the rights and freedoms of others.

This three-pronged approach guarantees that restrictions are not applied arbitrarily and respect the principles of legality and accountability inherent in the protection of human rights. It emphasizes a balanced method whereby any interference with rights is subjected to rigorous scrutiny, maintaining the integrity of individual freedoms while allowing for necessary constraints in specific circumstances.