Communication 1909 (Uruguay)

1909, of July 2, 1974, denounces the arrest of Uruguayan writer Mr. Armando González, in Montevideo, who allegedly had been tortured. It also denounces the arrest of Mr. Horacio Bazzano, Mrs. Aida Nieves Ambrossini, Mr. Guillermo Israel, Miss Ana Ghirardelli, and Mr. Felipe Ramos, also alleged to have been tortured.

In a letter dated February 25, 1975, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt to the claimants. The Commission, through a note dated February 7, 1975, requested the Government of Uruguay to provide the corresponding information. A copy of that note was transmitted to the Uruguayan Mission to the OAS on March 18, 1975.

Subsequent to this measure, the claimant, through a communication dated April 5, 1975, reported that the Third Military Trial Court ordered the release of all the prisoners referred to above and that order has not been carried out in the cases of Dr. Horacio Bazzano and Mr. Thomas Israel, who, after the order for release, were taken to the Cilindro Municipal of February 25, and have remained there since that time under orders from the Executive Power by virtue of the prompt security measures." The claimant pointed out that in accordance with the interpretation applied by the Government, neither a writ of habeas corpus nor any judicial writ can be used in this situation.

In a note of April 15, 1975, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt to the claimant.

The Commission considered this communication during its thirty-fifth sessions (May 1975) and since the Government of Uruguay had not replied to its request for information filed on February 7, it decided to repeat the request it had filed with that Government on February 7, also requesting copies of the judicial proceedings mentioned in each one of the cases involved in the claim and transmitting at the same time, the additional information provided by the claimant.

Pursuant to this decision a note was sent to the Government of Uruguay on August 7, 1975. On August 18, 1975, a copy of this note was transmitted to the Uruguayan Mission to the OAS. On September 12, the claimant was informed of the measures taken in connection with the case.

In a note dated September 18, 1975 (N1 331/75), the Government of Uruguay provided the following information on this case:

"I. General clarification

"Analysis of the cases listed in the denunciation being answered leads to formulation of the following general clarification, valid in all cases: A1. In Uruguay, 'prompt security measures' are in force adopted by the Executive Power in accordance with Article 168, paragraph 17 of the Constitution of the Republic to counter the seditious activities which, as is common knowledge, have plagued this country for some time.

"According to the text of the Constitution in question, prompt security measures authorize the arrest or transfer of individuals from one point in the territory to another.

"Individuals so arrested may not be imprisoned in local facilities for confinement of criminals.

"2. Neither torture nor inhumane practices of any kind are used in those facilities for detention, imprisonment or confinement.

"3. There is an organized and systematic international campaign to spread false information against my country which seeks to set up a false image of the national situation.

"The generic statements being answered should be analyzed within the context of these facts.

"II Information on the individual cases referred to

"1. Armando González- was arrested on January 15, 1975, for having been involved in the activities of an illegal organization and was brought to trial before the Military Trial Judge of the Third Court.

On February 26, 1975, he was released on the orders of the acting judge.

"2. Horacio Bazzano - was arrested on January 14, 1975, for having been involved in the activities of an illegal organization and was confined in the 'Cilindro Municipal ' under the control of the Executive Power, by virtue of the Prompt Security Measures.

"On May 16, 1975. he was released.

"3. Aída Nieves Ambrosoni- was arrested on January 18, 1975, as it was felt that she was involved in the activities of an illegal organization.

"She was released on January 20, 1975.

"4. Guillermo Israel- was arrested on January 14, 1975, for having been involved in activities of an illegal organization and was brought to trial before the Military Trial Judge of the Third Circuit.

"On February 25, 1975, the intervening judge ordered his release.

"Later, the Executive Power, bearing in mind that involved here was a German citizen who was committed to illegal activities in the Republic, ordered his expulsion from the country, in application of legal conditions in force; this was carried out on May 4, 1975, at 1:30 p.m. when he boarded K.L.M. flight 792 to Amsterdam.

"5. Thomas Israel- was arrested on January 14, 1975, for having been involved in the activities of an illegal organization, he was brought to trial under the Military Trial Judge of the Third Court.

"On March 18, 1975, Thomas Israel was released, on orders from the acting judge.

"6. Ana Ghirardelli- was arrested on November 5, 1973, for having been involved in activities of an ille- gal organization and brought to trial under the Military Trial Judge of the Third Court.

"On December 12, 1975, she was released, on the order of the acting magistrate.

"7. Felipe Ramos- was arrested on July 9, 1973, while disrupting the public peace through disturbances that took place on Avenida 18 Julio in Montevideo, and was imprisoned in the 'Cilindro Muncipal' under the control of the Executive Power by virtue of Prompt Security Measures.

The Secretariat acknowledged receipt to the Government of Uruguay on September 22, 1975, and through a letter dated September 24, 1975, the pertinent parts of the information provided by the Government of Uruguay were transmitted to the claimant.

During its thirty-sixth sessions (October 1975) the Commissions considered this communication together with the information provided by the Government of Uruguay; it decided to file the denunciation without prejudice to such observations as the claimant may be able to formulate.