HAVING SEEN:

1.         The judgment of January 19, 1995, that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter "the Court") delivered in the Neira Alegría et al. case, operative paragraph three of which declared that

… Perú is obliged to pay fair compensation to the next of kin of the victims on the occasion of these proceedings and to reimburse the expenditures that they have incurred in their petitions before the national authorities.

2.         The brief on reparations and expenditures that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter "the Commission") submitted to the Court on September 30, 1995, wherein it stated that Ms. "Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira" and her three children –all minors- were the next of kin of Mr. Víctor Neira Alegría who were entitled to compensation from the State of Peru (hereinafter "Peru" or "the State"); the Commission added that despite numerous efforts made, it had been unable to establish these persons’ whereabouts for the last six months.

3.         The Secretariat’s note of April 29, 1996, wherein it asked the Commission to clarify the information concerning the beneficiaries in the instant case by providing proof of kinship for "Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira, … and the three children of Víctor Neira Alegría."  On May 31, 1996, the Commission petitioned the Court to request information from Peru pertaining to the victims’ next of kin, adding that the State had never challenged the identity of the persons named as Mr. Neira Alegría’s next of kin.

4.         The Secretariat’s note of July 1, 1996, wherein it requested from Peru, among other documents, the birth certificates of "Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira (wife of Víctor Neira-Alegría)… and of the three children born of the Aquilina M. Tapia-Víctor Neira Alegría marriage."  In its reply of July 23, 1996, the State said that in order to search the vital records for the birth certificates, it would need to have the date and place of the respective births or where they had been registered.

5.         The judgment on reparations that the Court delivered in the instant case on September 19, 1996, paragraph 62 of which reads as follows:

On the basis of the information contained in the dossier, the Court has prepared the following list of beneficiaries entitled to compensation:

1)             Víctor Neira Alegría:

WIFE:

Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira (her whereabouts are unknown to the Commission)

CHILDREN:

Three minors  (not identified in the dossier and their whereabouts are unknown to the Commission)

            ...

Further, in paragraphs 42, 52 and 58 of that judgment, the Court stated that:

…the Court deems it fair to award an indemnity in the amount of US$2.000 to each of the victims’ families as compensation for the expenditures incurred in the various representations they made in the country.

…

[t]he compensation to be paid to Víctor Neira Alegría’s next of kin is US$26,872.48 .

…

[t]he Court, taking all the special circumstances of the case into account, concludes that it is fair and just to grant an indemnity of US$20.000 to each of the families of the deceased and to each of the survivors.

6.         The note from Peru, dated July 20, 1998, wherein it informed the Court that it had "complied with the reparations judgment handed down in the instant Case with payment of the amounts specified for compensation and the creation of a trust fund…"

7.         The brief filed by the representatives of the victims’ next of kin on August 17, 1998, wherein they reported that the next of kin of Mr. Neira Alegría have had difficulty collecting the compensatory damages they were due, because in the judgments the Court handed down on the merits and on the reparations, the name of the wife of Mr. Víctor Neira Alegría is shown as "AQUILINA M. TAPIA DE NEIRA", whereas her full name is "AQUILINA MEDINA-TAPIA DE NEIRA."   The representatives in question therefore requested that the Court clarify the name of the beneficiary so that she might receive payment of the compensation owed to her.  With their filing the representatives included a copy of the certificate of civil marriage between Víctor Raúl Neira-Alegría and Aquilina Medina-Tapia, a copy of the personal identity document (libreta electoral) of Ms. Aquilina Medina-Tapia and a copy of the birth certificates of Carlos Ernesto, Víctor José and Soledad, all with the surname Neira-Medina.

8.         The Secretariat’s note of August 18, 1998, wherein it requested that the State and the Commission present their observations on the brief submitted by the representatives of Mr. Neira-Alegría’s next of kin.

9.         The note from Peru, dated August 21, 1998, with which it forwarded a copy of the trust agreement that the Ministry of Defense and the Banco de la Nación signed on June 5, 1998 for administration of the funds.

10.       The communication from the Commission, dated August 21, 1998, whereby it concurred with the request made by the representatives of the victim’s next of kin in their brief of January 17 of this year.

CONSIDERING:

1.         That in its judgments on the merits and reparations in the instant case, the Court gave the name of the wife of Mr. Víctor Neira-Alegría as "Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira", in keeping with the information supplied by the Commission.  The State, for its part, never furnished the information that the Court had requested of it in this connection.

2.         That in the proceedings into the merits and reparations, there was never any dispute as to the generic name of the members of the Neira-Alegría family.

3.         That in clause six of the money-management trust agreement concluded between the Ministry of Defense and the Banco de la Nación, Ms. Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira was named as one of the beneficiaries and allotted the sum of US$15,957.50 (fifteen thousand nine hundred fifty-seven United States dollars and fifty cents); her three children, all minors, were not named in the agreement but were allotted the sum of US$32,914.98 (thirty-two thousand nine hundred fourteen United States dollars and ninety-eight cents.)

4.         That from the documentation furnished by the representatives of the victims’ next of kin, with which the Commission concurred and which the State did not challenge, it has been established that Ms. Aquilina Medina-Tapia de Neira is the same person named in the judgment as Aquilina M. Tapia de Neira.

5.         That from the birth certificates that the representatives of the victims’ next of kin provided, which the Commission accepted and the State did not challenge, the Court has established that the children of Mr. Víctor Neira-Alegría, referred to generically in the reparations judgment (preambular paragraph 5) are, by name, Carlos Ernesto, Víctor José and Soledad, all having the surname Neira-Medina.

6.         That given the foregoing, it is fully demonstrated that Ms. Aquilina Medina-Tapia de Neira and Carlos Ernesto, Víctor José and Soledad Neira-Medina are the beneficiaries named by the Court in its judgment of September 19, 1996; hence, the State is required to take the measures necessary so that the persons in question may receive the compensation payment.

NOW THEREFORE,

pursuant to Article 25 of its Statute and Article 29.2 of its Rules of Procedure,

THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

RESOLVES:

To request the State of Peru, in keeping with the judgment of September 19, 1996, to take all necessary measures so that Ms. Aquilina Medina-Tapia de Neira, Carlos Ernesto Neira-Medina, Víctor José Neira-Medina, and Soledad Neira-Medina receive the compensation due to them in the instant case, including the steps necessary for them to be accredited as the beneficiaries of the trust fund set up in the Banco de la Nación.