PRESS RELEASE (*)
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the “Court” or the “Inter-American Court”), at its XLV Regular Session held in its headquarters in San Jose, Costa Rica, from the 16th September to the 2nd October 1999, delivered judgment on the merits of the Cesti-Hurtado case, and on the interpretation of the judgment in the Blake case, on the 29th September and the 1st October 1999, respectively.
CESTI HURTADO CASE
The application interposed by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the 9th January 1998 refers to the presumed violation, by the State of Peru, of articles 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 7 (Right to Personal Liberty), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial), 11 (Right to Privacy), 17 (Rights of the Family), 21 (Right to Property), 25 (Right to Judicial Protection), and 51.2 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relationship to articles 1 and 2 thereof, as a result of the arrest, conviction and incarceration of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado after having been prosecuted in the Military jurisdiction, in spite of the existence of a final ruling in a civil rights protection remedy (habeas corpus) action ordering that he be withdrawn from such prosecution, and that no attempt be committed against his personal freedom. The Commission also requested the Court to demand that the State of Peru punish those responsible for the violations reported; to free Mr. Cesti-Hurtado; and to pay indemnity for the time he has inappropriately been imprisoned and for the damages thereby caused to his life and estate.
After deliberations on the allegations and evidence submitted by the parties, the Court unanimously resolved to:
1. declare that, to the detriment of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, the State of Peru violated articles 7.6 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraphs 123 to 133 of the judgement herein referred to, and order that it comply with the February 12, 1997 decision of the Specialized Public Law Court of Lima on the civil rights protection remedy interposed by Mr. Cesti-Hurtado;
2. declare that, to the detriment of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, the State of Peru violated articles 71.2 and 3 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraphs 140 to 143 of the judgement herein referred to;
3. declare that, to the detriment of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, the State of Peru violated article 8.1 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraph 151 of the judgement herein referred to;
4. declare that in this case a violation by the State of Peru against Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, of article 8.2 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraph 152 of the judgement herein referred to, was not proven;
5. declare that in this case a violation by the State of Peru against Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, of article 5.2 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraph 160 of the judgement herein referred to, was not proven;
6. declare that, to the detriment of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, the State of Peru violated articles 1.1 and 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraphs 166 to 170 of the judgement herein referred to;
7. declare that in this case a violation by the State of Peru against Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, of articles 11 and 21 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the terms indicated in paragraphs 177 and 178 of the judgement herein referred to, was not proven;
8. declare that the prosecution in the military jurisdiction against Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado is incompatible with the American Convention on Human Rights, and order the State to annul such prosecution, as well as all of the actions derived therefrom;
9. declare that the State of Peru is obliged to pay fair indemnity to Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti-Hurtado, and to reimburse him for the expenditures he may have incurred in relationship to this prosecution; and
10. order the initiation of the reparations phase, and commission its President to adopt, in due time, the measures deemed appropriate.
BLAKE CASE
The Court passed judgement on the merits of this matter on the 24th January 1998, and unanimously decided “that the State of Guatemala was obliged to pay fair indemnity to the relatives of mister Nicholas Chapman Blake, and to reimburse them for expenditures relative to pertinent steps taken by them before the Guatemalan authorities on the occasion of these proceedings.” In this judgement it was determined that, to the detriment of Mr. Blake's relatives, Guatemala violated the right to a fair trial (Article 8.1 of the American Convention in relationship to Article 1.1 thereof), and the right to humane treatment (Article 5 of the American Convention in relationship to Article 1.1 thereof), and that the State was obliged to make available all possible means at its disposal to investigate the facts reported, and to punish those responsible for the disappearance and death of mister Blake. The Court held deliberations on the 22nd January 1999, and set the amount of damages in this case, in compliance with the provisions of its Judgement of the 24th January 1998.
On the 21st April 1999, the State interposed a request for interpretation, making reference to operative item 4 of the judgement on the merits, and to operative item two, sections a.iii and b), of the judgement on reparations. In its claim the State alleged that there were discrepancies with respect to these items, since the judgement on the merits ordered Guatemala to reimburse for “expenditures relative to pertinent steps taken by them before the Guatemalan authorities on the occasion of these proceedings,” while in its judgement on reparations it ordered the State to pay for non-judicial expenditures, and to make a reimbursement for expenditures incurred during the processing of the case before the Inter-American human rights protection system.
Following is a transcript of the most relevant paragraphs of the interpretation judgement handed down by the Court:
As to the first argument of the State, relative to the payment of US$16,000,00 (sixteen thousand U.S. dollars) to the relatives of Mr. Nicholas Blake for “non-judicial expenditures,” the Court specifies that when it ordered said payment it was referring to expenditures incurred by the relatives of the victim for steps taken by them before the Guatemalan authorities, particularly Executive Branch authorities either military or administrative, as part of the proceedings to determine the whereabouts of Mr. Nicholas Blake. Therefore, there is no contradiction in this respect between the judgements on the merits and on reparations.
As to the second matter, relative to the reimbursement of expenditures incurred during the processing of the case before the Inter-American System, the Court clarifies that Article 23 of the Rules of Procedure in force recognizes the victims, their relatives or their representatives locus standi, which enables them to submit their own arguments and evidence independently at the reparations stage, and makes possible the recognition of their right to reimbursement for expenditures incurred in connection with their actions before the system.
In its January 22, 1999 judgement, the Court ordered the reimbursement for expenditures incurred for the processing of the case through the inter-American human rights system bodies, by sustaining the application filed in this respect by the relatives or representatives of the victim to the Court during the reparations stage.
Said compensation could be ordered only in the reparations judgement, as it was in fact done. Any reference in this respect could, consequently, be omitted from the judgement on the merits, without depriving the victim's relatives of their right to reimbursement for expenses incurred in connection with their actions before the inter-American system.
Because of the previously-cited reasons, the Court concluded that there is no contradiction as alleged by the State, between the provisions of the judgement on the merits (of the 24th January 1998) and those of the reparations judgement (of the 22nd January 1999), and that the indemnity ordered in the first one of these decisions for “expenditures relative to pertinent steps taken by them before the Guatemalan authorities on the occasion of these proceedings,” does not preclude the Court's power to order, as it did in the reparations judgement, the payment as claimed by the relatives of the victim, of both, the “non-judicial expenditures,” and the “reimbursement for expenditures incurred during the processing of the case before the Inter-American human rights protection system.”
Consequently, on the 30th September 1999 the Court, on the basis of Article 67 of the American Convention of Human Rights, unanimously resolved to:
1. Declare admissible the request for interpretation of the judgement of the 22nd January 1999 in the Blake case, submitted by the State of Guatemala.
2. Declare that the State of Guatemala must pay, in the terms of the judgement on reparations of the 22nd January 1999, the amounts ordered by the Court in operative paragraph two, sections a.iii, and b) of said judgement, to Mr. Richard Blake, Ms. Mary Blake, Mr. Richard Blake Jr., and Mr. Samuel Blake, as the parties injured, for non-judicial expenditures and reimbursement for expenditures incurred during the processing of the case before the Inter-American human rights protection system.
***
Other matters: The Court considered several matters pending, and analyzed the different reports submitted by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the States involved in the cases where provisional measures have been adopted. Specifically, it issued resolutions on the following matters: provisional measures adopted by the Court in the Carpio Nicolle case relative to Guatemala, the Giraldo Cardona case relative to Colombia, the James and others case relative to Trinidad and Tobago, and the Haniff Hilaire case against Trinidad and Tobago.
The members of the Inter-American Court are Antônio A. Cançado Trindade (Brazil), President; Máximo Pacheco-Gómez (Chile), Vice President; Hernán Salgado-Pesantes (Ecuador); Oliver Jackman (Barbados); Alirio Abreu-Burelli (Venezuela); Sergio García-Ramírez (Mexico), and Carlos Vicente de-Roux-Rengifo (Colombia). In addition, ad hoc judge Alfonso Novales-Aguirre, appointed by Guatemala for the Blake case, was also present. The Court's Secretary is Manuel E. Ventura-Robles, and Renzo Pomi is Deputy Secretary.
In conformity with the American Convention on Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, an autonomous legal institution of the Organization of American States established in 1979, is comprised of legal experts of the highest moral authority and recognized competence in the field of human rights.
For further information, please address all request to:
Manuel E. Ventura-Robles, Secretary
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Apartado 6906-1000, San Jose, Costa Rica
Telephone (506) 234 0581. Telfax (506) 234 0584
E-mail: corteidh@racsa.co.cr
San Jose, 4th October 1999.
(*) El contenido de este comunicado es responsabilidad de la Secretaría de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. El texto oficial de los documentos reseñados puede obtenerse mediante solicitud escrita dirigida a la Secretaría, en la dirección que se adjunta.
(*) The Secretariat of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights is responsible for the contents of this release. The official version of the documents referred to may be obtained by written request to the Secretariat at the address indicated.