2023-11-11 06:11:52
San José, Costa Rica, November 10, 2023.-
The Inter-American Court will hold its 163rd Regular Period of Sessions between November 13 and 29, 2023.
During it, the deliberations of Sentences of six Contentious Cases under study by the Court will be carried out and two Public Hearings will be held. The activities of the Period will be carried out in a hybrid manner, combining in-person and virtual activities.
I. Sentences
The Court will deliberate on the following Contentious Cases:
1. Case Community of La Oroya v. Peru
The present case is related to the alleged international responsibility of the State for the alleged damages caused to a group of residents of the Community of La Oroya, as a consequence of acts of pollution carried out by a metallurgical complex in said community. In general, it is alleged that Peru’s failure to comply with its international obligations allowed mining activity to generate high levels of pollution that have seriously impacted the health of the alleged victims. In this regard, it is argued that the State failed to comply with its obligation to act with due diligence in the execution of its duties to regulate, supervise and supervise the behavior of private and state companies regarding the potential impact on the human rights of the inhabitants of the city. community, as well as its general obligation to prevent human rights violations. On the other hand, in the case it is alleged that the State did not adopt adequate measures to address the risks caused by environmental contamination on the health of children in the community. It is also alleged that Peru did not guarantee public participation or the right of access to information of the alleged victims in decisions that would directly affect them, nor did it investigate the threats, harassment and reprisals against the alleged victims. In this sense, it is alleged that the State failed to comply with its immediate obligations regarding the right to a healthy environment and health, as well as its obligation to progressively achieve the full realization of said rights.
2. Case of Airton Honorato v. Brasil1
The case is related to the alleged responsibility of the State for the violent death of 12 people (José Airton Honorato, José Maia Menezes, Aleksandro de Oliveira Araujo, Djalma Fernandes Andrade de Souza, Fabio Fernandes Andrade de Souza, Gerson Machado da Silva, Jeferson Leandro Andrade, José Cicero Pereira dos Santos, Laercio Antonio Luis, Luciano da Silva Barbosa, Sandro Rogerio da Silva and Silvio Bernardino do Carmo) at the hands of military police belonging to the Group for the Repression and Analysis of Crimes of Intolerance (hereinafter “GRADI”). ). In this context, the Group for Repression and Analysis of Crimes of Intolerance acted with the intelligence service of the military police.
On March 5, 2002, in the town of Castelinho, located near the city of Sorocaba, in São Paulo, GRADI and the military police carried out the operation known as “Castelinho”, supposedly against members of the “Primeiro Comando da Capital”, alleged main criminal organization in Brazil. The Military Police allegedly surrounded the place with approximately one hundred police officers. Furthermore, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights alleged that more than 700 shots were fired.
The case also refers to the alleged lack of due diligence and reasonable time regarding the investigations and processes that were carried out as a result of the events.
3. Case of Tavares Pereira et al. v. Brazil2
The case relates to the alleged responsibility of the State for the alleged murder of rural worker Antonio Tavares Pereira, and the injuries allegedly suffered by another 185 workers belonging to the Landless Rural Workers Movement (MST), by police agents. military. The events occurred on May 2, 2000 in the state of Paraná, during a march for agrarian reform carried out by workers. The case also refers to the alleged impunity in which the facts remain and is framed in an alleged context of violence linked to demands for land and for agrarian reform in Brazil.
The Commission concluded that the State did not provide an explanation that would allow it to be considered that the death of Mr. Tavares Pereira was the result of the legitimate use of force. He pointed out that the shooting by the police officer that caused the death of Mr. Tavares Pereira did not have a legitimate purpose, nor was it an appropriate, necessary and proportional measure.
The Court will begin the deliberation of the Sentence on the following Contentious Cases:
4. Viteri Ungaretti and Others Vs. Ecuador
The present case is related to the alleged international responsibility of the State of Ecuador for the alleged reprisals suffered by Mr. Julio Rogelio Viteri Ungaretti, a member of the Armed Forces, and his family. It is alleged that said reprisals occurred as a result of a complaint about serious irregularities in the public administration and acts of corruption within the Armed Forces that Mr. Viteri made in November 2001. The case deals with the structural relationship between freedom of expression and democracy, in particular freedom of expression as a form of reporting acts of corruption. Reference is made to whether the actions, communications, or complaints of Mr. Viteri, in his role as a whistleblower, are protected by the right to freedom of expression, and whether the actions adopted by the State were justified or implied a restriction. disproportionate to the right to freedom of expression. The Commission alleged the State of Ecuador is responsible for the violation of the right to freedom of expression, the right to judicial protection and the right to personal liberty to the detriment of Mr. Viteri. Likewise, the violation of the right of movement and residence, and the right to mental and moral integrity to the detriment of Mr. Viteri and his family is alleged.
5. Case of Cajahuanca Vásquez v. Peru
The case is related to the alleged violations of conventional rights that occurred within the framework of a sanctioning process that ended with the dismissal of Mr. Humberto Cajahuanca Vásquez as a judge of the Superior Court of Justice of Huánuco. It is alleged that the State violated the principle of legality and favorability, because the grounds for dismissal applied were of significant breadth and did not refer to specific conduct that was disciplinary reprehensible, and because the most severe sanction was imposed on Mr. Cajahuanca, despite that another current norm contemplated a lesser sanction. It is also alleged that in this case the principle of judicial independence and the right to have duly reasoned decisions was violated, because the sanctioning ruling did not offer a motivation that clearly explained the reasons why the actions of the alleged victim merited the more severe sanction.
6. Case of Gutiérrez Navas et al. v. Honduras
The case is related to the alleged international responsibility of the Honduran State for the dismissal, described as arbitrary and illegal, of José Antonio Gutiérrez Navas, José Francisco Ruiz Gaekel, Gustavo Enrique Bustillo Palma and Rosalinda Cruz Sequeira from their positions as magistrates of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Honduras. According to the information provided, the events of the case would have occurred between 2012 and 2014. It is argued that at the time the alleged victims were dismissed, there was no provision in Honduras that regulated the jurisdiction of any authority and the sanctioning procedure of a political nature. that were subjected.”
Consequently, it is alleged that, in violation of the guarantees recognized in Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights, the National Congress created an ad hoc mechanism aimed at the dismissal of the aforementioned judicial authorities. Likewise, article 205, paragraph 20, of the Honduran Constitution indicates that Congress has the power to approve or disapprove the administrative conduct of magistrates, which is alleged to determine a norm of significant breadth that does not specify specific conduct that is disciplinary reprehensible. . For this reason, it is argued that this lack of predictability allowed Congress excessive discretion, which was openly contrary to the principle of legality. Furthermore, it is alleged that the alleged victims did not have the opportunity to be heard and prepare an adequate defense, since they were not summoned to exercise their right nor were they previously notified of any accusation or opening of a sanctioning procedure.
II. Public Hearings
The Court will hold a Public Hearing in a Contentious Case and in a Request for an Advisory Opinion. The hearings will be broadcast on the social networks of the Inter-American Court.
1) Case of Cuéllar Sandoval et al. v. El Salvador
The case refers to the alleged international responsibility of the Salvadoran State for the alleged forced disappearance of Patricia Emilie Cuéllar Sandoval, Mauricio Cuéllar Sandoval and Julia Orbelina Pérez, as well as the alleged lack of due diligence in the investigation and impunity for the events. Patricia Emilie Cuéllar Sandoval was an active collaborator of Christian movements since 1975 and served as secretary of the Office of Christian Legal Aid between 1979-1980. Between August and September 1978, approximately 50 agents of the National Police, dressed in civilian clothes and heavily armed, they would have raided her home and photographed her.
On July 5, 1980, several security and Armed Forces agents also raided his workplace. The National Police, in the report on said raid, described the members of the organization as “subversive,” which would have led the victim to resign from his position.
On July 27, 1982, one day before her alleged disappearance, Mrs. Cuéllar went to the offices of Socorro Jurídico Cristiano to report a persecution against her by security forces dressed in civilian clothes while she was traveling in her vehicle.
The next day, armed men in military uniforms searched Mrs. Cuéllar’s apartment and took several appliances, personal documents and a vehicle.
On the night of July 28, 1982 and the early morning of the following day, Mauricio Cuéllar Cuéllar, father of Patricia Cuéllar, and Julia Orbelina Pérez, who worked as a domestic service employee, were allegedly violently taken from the former’s home.
The public hearing will be held in person on Wednesday, November 22, 2023 starting at 09:00 (Costa Rica time).
2) Request for an Advisory Opinion on “the activities of private arms companies and their effects on human rights”
The Public Hearing on the Request for an Advisory Opinion on “the activities of private arms companies and their effects on human rights”, presented by the United Mexican States, will be held on November 28 and 29, 2023 starting at 9 a.m. :00 (Costa Rica Time).
III. Supervision of Compliance with Sentences, Provisional Measures, as well as administrative issues
In addition, the Court will supervise compliance with various Judgments and implementation of provisional Measures that are under its knowledge and procedural issues of different contentious cases. Also, you will see various administrative matters.
#InterAmerican #Court #Human #Rights #ordinary #session #November #analyze #Salvador #case #missing #persons