by Nicole L. Grimm*
Throughout 1998, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Court) released a number of decisions in individual cases that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Commission) submitted to the Court. The Commission presented these cases in accordance with Article 61 of the American Convention on Human Rights (Convention), which permits States Parties and the Commission to submit matters to the Court. In deciding these cases, the Court relied on the jurisdiction it possesses under Article 62 of the Convention, which gives the Court the authority to decide cases involving States Parties to the Convention and regarding the Convention's interpretation or application. These cases include, inter alia:
Facts: The Commission presented this case to the Court on March 21, 1996. The Commission alleged that Consuelo Benavides Cevallos was illegally and arbitrarily arrested and held by state agents operating without judicial authorization or supervision. She was subsequently tortured and killed. State authorities failed to adequately investigate the crime until three years after Benavides Cevallos' death, when her body was located and identified. After her death was confirmed, the government continued to fail to recognize its responsibility or make reparations to her family. The family presented a petition before the Commission, which initiated proceedings in October 1989.
On March 13, 1998, the Commission alerted the Court that it had received a proposal from Ecuador regarding the possibility of reaching a friendly settlement, and, on June 1, 1998, Ecuador informed the Court that it and Benavides Cevallos' family had reached an agreement. The Court held an audience with the parties to consider the accord on June 11, 1998. During this session, Ecuador acknowledged its responsibility for Benavides Cevallos' death and disappearance and stated that the Ecuadorian government was taking measures to publicize its responsibility for the matter throughout Ecuador. Furthermore, it stated that it intended to make the equivalent of U.S. $1 million in reparations for the harm it caused the victim and her family, and presented a check in that amount to the victim's family on July 12, 1998.
Decision: On June 19, 1998, the Court released its decision. Due to the parties' friendly settlement, the Court concluded that the case regarding the original allegations against Ecuador was over. The Court found that Ecuador, as the state acknowledged, violated its obligations under the Convention, including the duty of States Parties to respect the rights to juridical personality (Article 3), life (Article 4), humane treatment (Article 5), personal liberty (Article 7), a fair trial (Article 8), and judicial protection (Article 25). The Court approved the amount of reparations that Ecuador made and required the government to continue investigating the case in order to punish the responsible parties. Finally, the Court reserved the right to supervise Ecuador's implementation of the decision.
Facts: The Commission presented this case to the Court on August 3, 1995. The Commission alleged that members of a Guatemalan "civil patrol," a paramilitary body made up of civilians with the purpose of maintaining community security, detained and killed Nicholas Chapman Blake on March 28, 1985, and buried his body. In August 1987, civil patrol commanders ordered his body to be disinterred, burned, and re-buried elsewhere. During the next seven years, his family went to great lengths looking for the body and, as he was a U.S. citizen, solicited the help of the U.S. government, the U.S. embassy in Guatemala, and the Guatemalan government. After a series of deals with civil patrol leaders who provided them with information, Blake's family found his remains in June 1992. As of the date of the Court's decision, Guatemalan authorities had neither terminated their investigation of the crime nor punished any individuals suspected of being responsible.
In a July 2, 1996, decision dealing with preliminary questions in the case, the Court decided that Blake's detention and murder were completed in March 1985 and were not crimes of a continuing character.
Decision: The Court released its decision on January 24, 1998. Before issuing its determinations on the merits of the case, it addressed its jurisdiction over the crimes. Based on the fact that Guatemala did not submit itself to the Court's jurisdiction until March 9, 1987, the Court concluded that it did not have the authority to rule on violations of the Convention that occurred before that date. Due to its 1996 preliminary decision, the Court determined that Blake's detention and murder occurred before Guatemala became subject to the Court's jurisdiction.
In examining the merits of the case, the Court found that Guatemala's civil patrols acted as state agents, receiving training, equipment, and direction from the Guatemalan army at the time of Blake's death and ongoing disappearance, and, thus, their actions could be imputed to Guatemala. Because Blake's detention and death occurred before Guatemala became subject to the Court's jurisdiction, the Court held itself unable to determine whether Guatemala violated either Blake's right to liberty (Article 7) or life (Article 4) under the Convention. It also found that Blake's family did not utilize available judicial processes in Guatemala, and, as a result, the Court could not conclude that they were denied their right to judicial protection (Article 25). It did find that the civil patrol's actions and the continuing intransigence of Guatemalan authorities violated the right of Blake's family to a fair trial (Article 8.1), and that Blake's disappearance and the cruel treatment of his remains violated his family's rights to physical, mental, and moral integrity (Article 5). The Court ordered Guatemala to fully investigate Blake's death and punish those responsible, and it approved the initiation of reparation procedures. One dissenting and two concurring opinions accompanied the decision.
Facts: The Commission submitted this case to the Court on May 29, 1995. The underlying events began in April 1990, when individuals dressed in police uniforms of the city of Mendoza, Argentina, detained Adolfo Argentino Garrido Calderón and Raúl Baigorria Balmaceda. Witnesses later saw them being interrogated at Mendoza police headquarters and watched them leave in police vehicles. Their families were notified soon after the initial arrests, but they were never able to locate Garrido and Baigorria despite pursuing a wide variety of recourse, including habeus corpus petitions, criminal and civil complaints, and a case before the Commission.
On September 11, 1995, Argentina admitted its responsibility before the Commission for the two victims' forced disappearances, and it reiterated this acknowledgment before the Court in February 1996. At that time, the Court issued an opinion directing the parties to reach a settlement within six months. On January 31, 1997, the Court determined that the parties were unable to reach an agreement and, as a result, initiated proceedings to determine the types of restitution Argentina owed the victims' families.
Decision: The Court released its decision on August 27, 1998. It determined that, according to Article 63 of the Convention, Argentina was obliged to make reparations to the families of the victims whose rights it had violated. It placed this responsibility on Argentina despite the government's argument that it was Mendoza authorities, not federal agents, who had perpetrated the disappearances. The Court responded that the federal government of Argentina had obliged itself to protect the rights guaranteed in the Convention when it became a State Party and, therefore, was estopped from shifting responsibility to a regional governmental unit. The Court ordered Argentina to pay the equivalent of U.S. $111,000 to Adolfo Garrido's family and U.S. $64,000 to Raúl Baigorria's family, and to pay the equivalent of U.S. $45,500 to the families for court and attorney costs. In addition, the Court obliged Argentina to investigate the disappearances and prosecute the parties responsible for the crimes.
Facts: The Commission presented this case to the Court on January 19, 1995. The Commission asked the Court to determine whether Guatemalan state agents violated the human rights of 11 alleged victims by arresting, arbitrarily detaining, and subjecting them to inhumane treatment and torture between 1987 and 1988. Six of the victims were killed. In the majority of the cases, witnesses observed the victims being arrested or kidnapped by state agents and forced into light colored "panel"-style trucks. Most of the victims who were killed died from similar injuries involving knife wounds to the throat and body.
Decision: On March 8, 1998, the Court released its decision. The Court determined that Guatemala violated the right to liberty (Article 7) of eight of the victims, the right to life (Article 4) of five victims, the right to personal integrity (Article 5.1) and freedom from torture and inhumane treatment (Article 5.2) of seven victims, the right to a fair trial (Article 8.1) of six victims, and the right to judicial protection (Article 25) of five victims. It directed Guatemala to initiate a genuine and effective investigation into the cases in order to discover and punish the persons responsible, and held that Guatemala is obliged to pay reparations to the victims and their families. The Court approved the establishment of proceedings for determining an appropriate amount of reparations.
*Nicole L. Grimm is a third year J.D. candidate at the Washington College of Law and the Senior Articles Editor for The Human Rights Brief.