El Salvador constitutional amendment sparks international concerns over human rights News
Casa Presidencial , El Salvador, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons
El Salvador constitutional amendment sparks international concerns over human rights

Amnesty International on Friday expressed deep concern over the recent amendment to Article 248 of El Salvador’s constitution, warning that the change could drastically undermine human rights protections.

Amnesty International Americas director Ana Piquer criticized the new legislative method imposed by the amendment, suggesting it “could undermine human rights in the future and limit people’s opportunities to participate in public affairs.” The rights organization claimed that this reduction in civic space and public engagement in governmental decisions threatens to sideline necessary public input and consolidate power, risking the erosion of democratic norms and the rule of law.

Historically, any constitutional changes in El Salvador required approval across two consecutive legislative sessions. This process was designed to be measured and inclusive, allowing ample time for public debate and ensuring a variety of perspectives could influence legislative reforms. On January 29, 2025, however, the Legislative Assembly ratified an amendment to Article 248 of the Constitution of El Salvador and significantly altered this procedure. The law now permits a single legislative body, armed with a three-quarter majority, to enact constitutional changes, potentially leading to rapid ratification of amendments with less time for consideration.

Furthermore, critics argue that the modification of Article 248 could set a precedent for future amendments that might weaken the judicial system and diminish human rights protections. The ruling party’s existing supermajority in the Legislative Assembly, coupled with its history of pushing through significant legal changes with minimal consultation, indicates that this trend is likely to continue under the new procedure.

The international community, including human rights organizations and political analysts, has echoed Amnesty International’s concerns. There is strong advocacy for the return to a more transparent and participatory constitutional process to safeguard human rights and democracy in El Salvador. This call to action is underscored by ongoing concerns over the country’s adherence to its human rights obligations, especially under recent states of emergency that have further restricted public freedoms and access to justice. Rights advocates argue that these conditions have set a troubling precedent for the implications of the new constitutional amendment.

THIS DAY @ LAW

Nixon nominated Harrold Carswell to the US Supreme Court

On January 19, 1970, President Richard Nixon nominated Judge G. Harrold Carswell of the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to the US Supreme Court. The nomination became intensely controversial after a reporter discovered the text of a 1948 political campaign speech by Carswell in which he said "segregation of the races is proper." The Senate eventually rejected the nomination 51-45. ------------------- Afterword In November 2004, a JURIST reader wrote with regard to this entry: You are factually correct. The speech is accurately quoted. But the most significant part of it wasn't that quote -- which, after all, reflected the law of the land through Brown v. Board of Education. The most significant part was Carswell's avowal of his "firm, vigorous belief in the principles of white supremacy." I recall this because I was the reporter who discovered the speech, in the basement of the Wilkinson County courthouse in Georgia, where it was preserved as lead story in The Irwinton Bulletin, a weekly Carswell edited, which was kept because it was the legal paper of record." Edward Roeder later added: "just to ensure the accuracy of my quote from the speech -- including capitalization and punctuation -- let me check it. At the moment, I'm at the Library of Congress, a couple of blocks from my home where I have a photograph I took of the speech as printed in 1948 in the weekly newspaper. Another great quote spawned by that confirmation battle was by Sen. Judiciary Committee Ranking Republican Roman Hruska, in response to the charge that Carswell was "mediocre." Hruska famously told the cameras staked outside the hearing room: "Even if he was mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers . . . They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises and Cardozos and Frankfurters and stuff like that there." One other aspect of that nomination might be worth noting. After Carswell's defeat, the seat went to Harry Blackmun. A year and a half later, he wrote Roe v. Wade," probably the most controversial and far-reaching SCOTUS decision since Brown."And finally:I found and reviewed my photo of Carswell's 1948 speech. First, it may be helpful to provide a bit of context for the part you quoted. The graf read, "I Am A Southerner By Ancestry, Birth, Training, Inclination, Belief And Practice. I Believe That Segregation Of The Races is Proper And The ONLY Practical And Correct Way Of Life In Our States." The first letter of each word is capitalized, the the word ONLY is in all caps. The "white supremacy" quote, two grafs later, is as strident: "I Yield To NO MAN, As A Fellow Candidate, Or As A Fellow Citizen, In The Firm Vigirous Belief In The Principles Of White Supremacy, And I Shall Always Be So Governed." Again, the first letter of each word is capitalized, and NO MAN is in all caps. "Vigorous" is misspelled in the newspaper. JURIST thanks Mr. Roeder for sharing his recollections - and his role in a fascinating snippet of Supreme Court history.

Tribunal established for Japan war criminals

On January 19, 1946, General Douglas MacArthur promulgated the Charter for the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, creating a court in Tokyo to try Japanese war criminals after World War II. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Charter, the Court's Rules of Procedure were set three months later. The judges and prosecutors represented the allied nations of the United States, the USSR, China, the Netherlands, Canada, France, New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom, the Philippines, and India. Article 6 of the Charter divided the accused War Criminals into three classes. Class A war criminals were those guilty of crimes against peace. Class B war criminals were those found guilty of actual war crimes. The highest-level war criminals fell into Class C for crimes against humanity. Court prosecutors indicted over 5,700 people in Japan for Class B and C War Crimes. When the tribunal's final judgment was issued two years later on November 1, 1948, 984 of the defendants were convicted and sentenced to death. 475 of them were convicted and sentenced to life in prison, while 2,944 received lesser prison terms. Finally, 1,297 Japanese defendants were either acquitted, not tried, or not sentenced. Many Japanese defendants were indicted for their actions during the occupation of China. Read the indictment of Class A war criminals involved in the Rape of Nanking.

American Civil Liberties Union founded

The American Civil Liberties Union was founded on January 19, 1920 by a group of civil rights activists and lawyers. The group's founders included Helen Keller, labor activist Elizabeth Gurley-Flynn and future Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter. The organization would be involved in the Scopes Monkey Trial and the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education. Learn more about the history of the American Civil Liberties Union.