ABSTRACT
This chapter considers the way in and the extent to which aspects of the definition have found expression in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (The Court or IACtHR) and the United Nations Human Rights Committee. It explores the extent of satisfaction of the right to the truth in terms of a state’s duty to investigate, the Court’s approach to reparations and the significance of its own findings of fact. As well as enforcing the right to the truth through the duty to investigate and the related remedies, the Court, gives effect to the right through the narrative in its judgments. Nevertheless, the norms behind the right to the truth, as with the Inter-American Court, are given some degree of effect through a duty to investigate, reparations and the Committee’s own narrative. The public purpose of disclosing truth can be seen, for instance, in the socially imaginative remedies awarded by the Inter-American Court.
