ABSTRACT
Relatives of disappeared persons are recognized as victims of a violation in their own right, because of the anguish and stress caused by the enforced disappearance of their loved ones, the continuing uncertainty on their fate and whereabouts and the attitude of indifference shown by authorities in the face of their pain. Albeit the principle is relatively straight-forward, an analysis of international jurisprudence shows that significant discrepancies exist on rather major issues, beginning with who could validly claim the victim status. The answers given by international human rights mechanisms depend largely on the position taken on another crucial issue, i.e. the rationale to recognize specific persons or groups of persons as victims in the first place. The burden of proof applied weighs significantly on the subjects at stake. Lastly, for those who overcome all the procedural hurdles and are recognized as victims, what is the name given to the violation(s) endured? Moving from an analysis of the jurisprudence of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights, as well as of the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on Enforced Disappearances, the chapter aims at illustrating the main existing discrepancies and their ramifications, including on the measures of reparation awarded.
