Ejecución asimétrica de las medidas ordenadas por la Corte Interamericana: análisis de los casos contra el Perú (2016-2020)

Compliance with the judgments of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights is essential for the effectiveness of the Inter-American System, as it allows for the transformation of declarations of responsibility into concrete reparations for victims. However, the implementation phase remains one of its most fragile aspects, especially when the measures ordered require regulatory reforms, sustained inter-institutional coordination, or complex state implementation capacities. In this context, this article aims to analyze the asymmetric implementation of the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court in judgments issued against Peru during the period 2016-2020, identifying implementation patterns according to the type of reparation measure. Methodologically, the study adopts a legal-empirical approach based on the analysis of twelve judgments, from which 59 reparation measures were syste-matized, classified into 6 legal categories, and evaluated according to 3 levels of compliance: full, partial, and non-compliance. The results show that implementation is not uniform, but rather follows a fragmented and differentiated pattern: measures of satisfaction and certain delimited economic obligations show higher levels of implementation, while those related to investigation and punishment, rehabilitation, and guarantees of non-repetition show greater levels of postponement. In conclusion, the Peruvian case reveals a selective and structurally differentiated logic of implementation, which limits comprehensive reparations and requires understanding state compliance not as the isolated performance of acts of compliance, but as the comprehensive, coherent, and effective implementation of the set of conventional obligations ordered by the Court.