Trapped within state normative and institutional limits? Internal conventionality control in the Inter-American Human Rights System

Abstract This article critically examines the domestic implementation of the doctrine of conventionality control within the Inter-American Human Rights System. It analyses the jurisprudential construction of this doctrine by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the significant normative and institutional tensions that arise from its internal application. While conventionality control has become a central mechanism for strengthening the effectiveness of the American Convention on Human Rights and for promoting the internalization of international human rights standards, its operationalization has revealed profound structural difficulties. The article explores the diversity of constitutional frameworks, the fragmentation of competences among domestic authorities, the absence of clearly defined procedures, and the challenges posed to constitutional autonomy, subsidiarity, and the margin of appreciation of States. It argues that the core difficulty lies not in the legitimacy of conventionality control as such, but in its practical implementation at the domestic level, and concludes that a sustainable model requires institutional reforms, clearer internal mechanisms, and a more balanced judicial dialogue between national courts and the Inter-American Court.