The implementation of the decisions of the IACHR in Brazil is the central theme of this work. The goal is to understand the apparent contradiction between efforts by states creating treaties and developing international regimes for the protection of human rights and their corresponding inefficiency in meeting internally the judgments issued by the Court. Inductively, the first observation was that empirically there is no continuity between the domestic and international legal systems, exactly hindered by the actions of the state. Therefore, it is necessary to study further deepen political organization of the state itself, as an attempt to find a justification for blocking of the state in compliance with the judgments of the IACHR, since in neither case were the express declaration of compliance sentences . Therefore the theoretical considerations of Tilly (1996) is explored, whereby the states would enroll own political careers, not necessarily following the same steps in Europe. Furthermore, in accordance with the theoretical arguments of the author, to which the war would be an important catalyst for policy change in state, it is possible to attribute special importance to the historical developments of World War II, in order to be the most important last war with deeper and more comprehensive impact . Associating with Tilly s theses changes resulting from the Second World War, it is theoretically possible to identify at least two factors that have influence in implementing the decisions of the judgments of the Court. The first one is related to the incorporation of institutions , derived from the European model of state formation in very different circumstances and the second associated with the relationship between state and population / people / citizens. After these findings, specific cases of condemnation against Brazil were analyzed as well as the measures taken one by one . The objective becomes, then, to understand the problem first proposed from theoretical foundation presented.