REPORT Nº 12/97
March 12, 1997
On November 9, 1994, the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights received a complaint against the Ecuadorian State in which it
is alleged that Mr. Víctor Rosario Congo died as result of
mistreatment and attacks by agents at the Social Rehabilitation Center
in Machala, Ecuador. The
events occurred within a context of numerous attacks and mistreatment
that had been committed against the prisoners.
According to reports by the officials themselves at the Machala
Social Rehabilitation Center, prison conditions were deplorable and
strong pressure was exerted on the inmates not to report the
the prisoners bore marks indicating that they had been physically
treatment was given, especially on visiting days. An investigation was under way concerning guards at the
penitentiary smuggling in alcohol and drugs and then using them to
bribe the prisoners.
According to the complaint, it is alleged that on September 14,
1990, Víctor Rosario
Congo, a prisoner at the Machala Social Rehabilitation Center who was
mentally ill, was assaulted with a garrote by guards at the
Rehabilitation Center, causing him serious injury.
Despite his condition, the prisoner was stripped naked, placed
in solitary confinement, and denied medical care.
The petitioners state in their complaint that on October 2,
1990, medical examiners from the office of the District Attorney
confirmed the condition of the prisoner, stating in their report that
he had welts on his body caused by flaying and a contusion that was
dirty and caked with mud. On
October 18, 1990, the Third Transfer Agent in El Oro requested that
prisoner Congo be moved to a hospital; however, there was no immediate
response to this request. On
October 24, 1990, Víctor Rosario Congo was transferred to the Men's
Social Rehabilitation Center in Guayaquil, and the next day, October
25, 1990, he was moved to Luis Vernaza Hospital, where he died a few
Prior to the death of Víctor Rosario Congo, nongovernmental
organizations had requested, through various avenues, that he be moved
to a hospital so that he could receive proper medical care.
Documents accompanying the complaint
of the Third Transfer Agent at El Oro:
The report of October 8, 1990, prepared by the Third Transfer
Agent at El Oro and addressed to the Fiscal Judge of El Oro, refers to
his participation in a meeting at the Machala Social Rehabilitation
Center attended also by Dr. Martha Sánchez de Rodríguez, Executive
Secretary of the El Oro Commission on Human Rights, Dr. Luis Chuchuca
Pasiche, Governor of the Province of El Oro, Dr. Reinaldo Montaño,
Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Machala, and Alberto Soriano,
Director of the Machala Social Rehabilitation Center.
At this meeting Dr. Sánchez announced that there was a special
case in Cell No. 12 of the Rehabilitation Center, namely that of Mr.
Congo, and specifically requested that the cell be visited.
In response to this announcement, the Director of the Machala
Social Rehabilitation Center reported at that same meeting that, as
far as the Congo case was concerned, appropriate legal steps had
already been taken regarding an attack by one of the guards, Walter
Osorio, against Mr. Congo. He
indicated that the case was in the hands of the judicial system and
that Mr. Rosario Congo had already received medical treatment.
The participants at the meeting took a tour inside the Machala
Social Rehabilitation Center and concluded that:
...(3) in Cell No. 12 we observed the situation of prisoner
Congo, who appeared to be mentally ill and suffering from a head wound
which, according to versions given by several of the inmates, had been
inflicted by guard Osorio. He
was naked and had been in the cell for three months...
In the conclusion of this report, the Third Transit Agent at El
Oro made the following statement:
In regard to the irregularity that I was able to observe
personally, namely the case of Mr. Rosario Congo, in light of this
prisoner's well-known mental condition, he should be placed in a
psychiatric facility for rehabilitation, where he can also receive
In a written document submitted by attorney Martha Sánchez de
Rodríguez, Executive Secretary of the El Oro Diocesan Commission on
Human Rights on September 28, 1990, it was reported to the El Oro
Fiscal Judge that Mr. Víctor Amable Rosario Congo was a prisoner
accused of robbery and that, according to investigations and what had
been observed, he is suffering from dementia, which means that he
cannot be charged for the crime.
She went on to state that the prisoner had been attacked and
tortured by prison guards. Dr.
Sánchez requested that Mr. Rosario Congo be evaluated immediately by
a medical examiner and that the case be investigated with a view to
determining the responsible parties.
petition containing the request for psychiatric evaluation of the
accused was referred on September 20, 1990, to the Second Criminal
Judge of El Oro, who was familiar with the criminal cases against him.
María Teresa Bernal, Second Transit Agent at El Oro, sent a letter to
the Second Police Commissioner of Machala at the end of September
ordering a medical evaluation of Víctor Rosario Congo as part of the
investigation of the alleged attacks and torture that the victim had
suffered at the hands of one of the guards of the Machala Social
October 1990 Víctor Amable Rosario Congo was evaluated by medical
experts José R. Santacruz and Wilmer Riofrío R., who reported as
The subject is an adult approximately 50 years old who at the
time of the medical examination was ambulatory and lucid but
disoriented as to time and space.
During the interview he was ... unkempt and only partially
clothed, dressed only in a dirty mud-streaked T-shirt.
Assistance was required to keep the patient from disrobing
completely. His attitude
was totally absurd and infantile and his actions were erratic and
aimless.... Physical examination of the patient revealed a partially
healed contusion 6 cm long on his scalp in the rear left parietal
region, going from the front to back.
The wound was dirty and caked with mud.
On his elbows there were several welts ranging between 0.5 and
1.0 cm in diameter caused by flaying, some of them already in the form
of healed scars and others in the process of healing.
On his right knee there were several scrapes, some of them
infected and others already healed.
The medical experts concluded:
"The signs observed in the patient during the course of
the medical examination, coupled with his overall demeanor, are
indicative of a psychiatric condition bordering on psychosis
(insanity). The etiology
of this condition may be related to his current experience. This would place his diagnosis among the so-called
prison-related psychoses, including Ganser's syndrome, which tend to
improve notably with a change of environment.
For this reason we suggest that he be transferred to a
psychiatric facility. Because
of the lesion on his head, probably the result of a heavy blow
inflicted by a hard object, he is considered to be incapacitated and
unable to work for seven days from the date on which it occurred,
assuming that there are no complications."
of Víctor Rosario Congo
Director of the Machala Social Rehabilitation Center sent a
communication on October 8, 1990, requesting the National Director of
Social Rehabilitation to authorize the transfer of Víctor Rosario
Congo to the Guayaquil Men's Social Rehabilitation Center so that he
could receive medical care. This
request was referred to the Second Criminal Judge of El Oro on
September 20, 1990.
October 23, 1990, the Second Criminal Judge of Machala, in a
communication addressed to the Director of the Machala Social
Rehabilitation Center, ordered the transfer of Víctor Rosario Congo
to the Lorenzo Ponce Psychiatric Hospital in the city of Guayaquil so
that he might undergo the prescribed psychiatric treatment. On October 24, 1990, the prisoner was moved to the
Psychiatric Hospital, where he was refused admission, following which
he was taken to the Luis Vernaza Hospital, where he was also refused
admission. He was left at
the Men's Social Rehabilitation Center in Guayaquil, and on the next
day, October 25, 1990, he was admitted to the Luis Vernaza Hospital,
where he died a few hours later.
the autopsy performed on Víctor Rosario Congo it was determined that
the causes of death had been degree III malnutrition and dehydration
leading to cardiopulmonary insufficiency.
on the facts contained in the complaint, it is alleged that the
victim's rights to life, personal integrity, and judicial protection
were violated, which are covered by Articles 4, 5, and 25 of the
American Convention on Human Rights.
When Víctor Rosario Congo was attacked by one of the guards at
the Social Rehabilitation Center where he was detained and suffered a
contusion on his head as a consequence thereof, he failed to receive
proper medical care. Moreover,
despite the fact that he was suffering from mental illness, he was not
given psychiatric treatment. When
he was finally transferred to another facility in order to receive
care, it was already too late and he died.
These violations of the rights of Víctor Rosario Congo took
place when he was in the custody of authorities at a detention center
PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COMMISSION
complaint concerning the alleged abuse and death of the victim Víctor
Rosario Congo was presented to the Commission on November 9, 1994,
together with supporting documentation such as the medical evaluation
of the victim, in which it was determined that he was suffering from a
prison-related psychosis and, in addition, that he had a contusion on
his head. In light of the
foregoing, the medical examiners recommended that Mr. Rosario Congo be
transferred to a psychiatric facility.
addition to the initial petition, the file included a copy of the
communications sent by attorney Martha Sánchez de Rodríguez,
Executive Secretary of the El Oro Diocesan Commission on Human Rights,
denouncing the abuse to which Mr. Rosario Congo had been subjected and
stressing the urgent need for him to be moved to a specialized medical
documentation included two articles from the newspaper "El Correo,"
the first with the heading "Guard Almost Kills Prisoner: Dying
Inmate Confined in Pestilent Dungeon," dated Saturday, September
29, 1990, and the other, "Prisoner Dies, Wounded by Guard,"
dated October 29, 1990. These
articles denounce the situation of Mr. Rosario Congo, reporting how he
had been brutally beaten by one of the prison guards and then placed
in solitary confinement without water or light and obliged to attend
to his biological needs in the same area where he slept, without any
intercession on the part of prison authorities.
As a consequence of this, Mr. Rosario Congo died.
Several government authorities sharply criticized and accused
of complicity for not having intervened in time.
February 15, 1995, the Commission transmitted the file corresponding
to the complaint to the State of Ecuador and gave it 90 days in which
to respond. In that same
communication the Commission asked the State to provide any element of
judgment that might enable it to determine whether or not all recourse
to internal jurisdiction had been exhausted in Case 11.427.
May 29, 1995, the State of Ecuador responded to the Commission and
presented documentation in the case of Mr. Rosario Congo.
Among the documents submitted were:
Copy of the autopsy report for Mr. Rosario Congo, stating that
it had been established that the causes of death were degree III
malnutrition and dehydration.
Copy of a note dated September 28, 1990, sent to the Director
of Machala Rehabilitation Center by the physician assigned to that
detention center, recommending that the accused be transferred to a
specialized facility because of his mental problems.
that Walter Osorio, the guard who allegedly attacked Víctor Rosario
Congo, had resigned from his post on November 28, 1990.
of a police report dated May 1, 1995, on the investigation into the
death of Víctor Rosario Congo. The
report refers to steps taken by the police, such as interviews of the
present and former Director of the Machala Rehabilitation Center, as
well as other persons who had had direct contact with the patient
during the final days before his death.
In the interview with the current Director of the Machala
Social Rehabilitation Center, Dr. Wilmer Riofrío, this official
stated that when the events took place he was serving in the capacity
of physician at that facility and that they had occurred at a time
when the center's officials were in a meeting with officials from
other centers throughout the country.
Furthermore, he stated that, according to what he had heard,
prisoner Víctor Rosario Congo was already suffering from mental
illness prior to the date when he was beaten by guard Walter Osorio.
In the interview with the former Director of the Machala Social
Rehabilitation Center, Francisco Alberto Soriano, this official
insisted that Víctor Rosario Congo had already been suffering from
the condition known as Ganser's syndrome, which is not uncommon among
prisoners, for one to three months prior to his confinement. He did not attempt to excuse the actions of guard Walter
Osorio and said that he had attempted to give the prisoner humane
treatment, which was why he had been placed in solitary confinement. In addition, he had requested that the prisoner be
transferred to a psychiatric hospital and the actions of the guard had
been denounced in a report to the National Director of Social
Rehabilitation in Quito.
According to Francisco Soriano, the blow inflicted on the
aforementioned prisoner by guard Osorio could have affected his mental
state, by somewhat aggravating his condition, and led in the long run
to his death. He added that in any case the guard who struck him had
resigned the month after the prisoner's death.
He claimed, moreover, that he had not been receiving adequate
support from the National Bureau for the work that needed to be done,
and it was for this reason that he himself had transferred the
prisoner to Guayaquil. In
fact, the authorization from Quito had arrived two days after the
In addition, some of the records had been reviewed at Luis
Vernaza Hospital where the victim died, including his clinical
history, the causes of death, the dates of his admission and
discharge, etc. At the
Machala Social Rehabilitation Center information was gathered on the
psychiatric evaluations and the reports filed regarding the attacks on
Mr. Rosario Congo by guard Walter Osorio.
By way of conclusion, the police report established that:
- Prisoner Víctor Rosario Congo had died as a result of III
degree malnutrition and dehydration and cardiopulmonary insufficiency
on October 25, 1990, at Luis Vernaza Hospital in Guayaquil.
- There are serious presumptions that guard Walter Arturo
Osorio Marca was involved as the perpetrator of the scalp wound
suffered by prisoner Víctor Rosario Congo.
- Prior to being wounded by guard Osorio, prisoner Víctor
Rosario Congo already
suffered from a mental condition known as Ganser's syndrome.
State's reply was sent to the petitioners on June 19, 1995, and they
were given 45 days in which to submit their comments.
June 20, 1995, the State provided the Commission with additional
information from the Ministry of State and Policy, including reports
and findings from the investigations into the death of Víctor Rosario
Congo. Their covering
report, dated May 11, 1995, indicates that:
Effective July 25, 1990, Víctor Rosario Congo was interned as
a prisoner at the Machala Social Rehabilitation Center by order of the
Second Criminal Judge of El Oro in connection with Criminal Cases Nº
209-90, for robbery, and No. 205-90, also for robbery.
In September 1990 he began to suffer from disturbed mental
faculties and for this reason was transferred to solitary confinement.
The prisoner was beaten by guard Walter Osorio one night when
the former attempted to take him hostage and he eventually lost
control, at which point, claiming that it had been necessary to
restore calm among the prisoners, he struck him on the head, producing
a contusion. The police
report goes on to add information about the medical evaluation of the
prisoner and the need for him to be transferred to a specialized
facility. It also states that, according to the information obtained on
autopsy, grade III malnutrition and dehydration were what had caused
the death of Víctor Rosario Congo.
In its conclusions the report states that the investigations
led to the findings that Víctor Rosario Congo had indeed been beaten
by one of the guards at the Rehabilitation Center despite the fact
that he had been suffering from mental illness, and also that his
being kept in solitary confinement and denied adequate medical
treatment in his wounded and disoriented state was the result of
negligence on the part of the responsible authorities.
June 27 the relevant portions of the additional documents which had
been submitted to the State were passed on to the petitioners, who
were given 45 days in which to submit their reply to the Commission.
October 26, 1995, the request for information from the petitioners was
reiterated, and this information was again requested on May 10, 1996,
inasmuch as it had not yet been provided.
July 10, 1996, the Commission received a response from the petitioners
pointing out that the police report had erred by not mentioning that
court officials were aware of the situation of Víctor Rosario Congo
at the Machala Rehabilitation Center. In addition, the petitioners insisted that the case of Mr.
Rosario Congo was a matter of a death occurring in custody arising
from a blow to the prisoner and subsequent lack of timely medical care
due to his detention in solitary confinement.
petitioners asserted that the investigations conducted by the police
and the actions taken in regard to the death of Víctor Rosario Congo
were indicative of pressure to close the investigation into the cause
of death. They said that
there had been irregularities in connection with the procedures
followed and the documents submitted, such as:
after a careful analysis of the forensic practices and the
procedures that were followed prior to the postmortem examination, it
is observed that there were unjustified delays in these procedures and
that they had not been adequately performed.
According to the date on the autopsy report, the procedure was
performed two days after the death of Víctor Rosario Congo according
to the date on the report thereof, and no time has been indicated.
The postmortem examination had been too cursory and
insufficient information had been given.
The decision regarding the cause of death was rushed.
There is no mention of whether or not organ samples were taken
for pathological analysis....
Inasmuch as there had been an earlier case of violence which
had been legally proven, there was reason to question whether or not
the death of Víctor Rosario Congo was due to natural causes.
Such circumstances required that forensic tests be conducted
immediately and the results systematically compiled so that they could
serve as key evidence in any later investigation, but this scenario
had not been taken into account.
July 10, 1996, the Commission sent the relevant portions of the
foregoing communication to the State of Ecuador.
September 4, 1996, the State submitted its response to the Commission,
which included documents concerning the detention of Víctor Rosario
Congo and his subsequent death but did not state anything new in
regard to the documentation previously added to the case on file with
the Commission. On
November 7, 1996, the State acknowledged receipt of this
CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING ADMISSIBILITY
its 95th Regular Session, held from February 24 to March 14, 1997, the
Commission gave its opinion on the admissibility of Case 11.427.
of the Commission
seen the background documentation and the procedures followed in
processing the complaint, as outlined above, the Commission considered
the admissibility of the case based on the following criteria:
Commission may hear a case submitted to it for consideration when and
if, prima facie, it meets the formal requirements of
admissibility set forth in Article 46 of the Convention and Article 32
of the Regulations of the Commission.
virtue of ratione loci, the Commission is empowered to hear
petitions regarding violations of human rights that affect a person
who is subject to the jurisdiction of a Signatory Party to the
American Convention. The
fact that the events cited in the complaint took place within the
territory of the Republic of Ecuador, which has been a Signatory Party
to the Convention since December 28, 1977, allows the Commission to
hear the case of Víctor Rosario Congo.
casu, the complaint presented by the petitioners refers to events
associated with presumed violations of the rights of Víctor Rosario
Congo to life, physical integrity, and judicial protection--rights
covered by Articles 4, 5, and 25 of the American Convention on Human
Rights--by reason of which it falls within the jurisdiction, ratione
materiae, of the Commission pursuant to Articles 44 and 47(b) of
the foregoing international instrument.
Commission considers that there is no reason to admit the allegation
that the complaint is manifestly unfounded, since the petitioners have
demonstrated that the presumed violation is imputable to a body or to
agents of the State, in accordance with the terms of Article 47(c) of
the Convention. In the
paragraphs regarding analysis of the exhaustion of all means of
internal recourse, it has been indicated that the presumed violations
would be the result of actions or omissions on the part of officials
of the Penitentiary System and the Judiciary of Ecuador.
of all means of internal recourse
question of exhaustion of all means of recourse to internal jurisdiction
is covered in Article 46, 1(a) and (b) of the American Convention,
In order for a petition or communication presented in accordance
with Articles 44 or 45 to be admitted by the Commission, it shall be
All recourse to internal jurisdiction has been exercised and
exhausted, in accordance with generally recognized principles of
The petition has been presented within six months from the date
on which the party whose rights presumably have been violated has been
notified of a final decision.
American Convention on Human Rights also allows, in its Article 46.2,
for three exceptions to the requirement to exhaust all internal
recourse, as follows:
The provisions of paragraphs 1.a and 1.b of this article shall
not be applicable when:
the domestic legislation of the state concerned does not afford
due process of law for the protection of the right or rights that have
allegedly been violated.
the party alleging violation of his rights has been denied access
to the remedies under domestic law or has been prevented from exhausting
There has been unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgment
under the aforementioned remedies.
37 of the Regulations of the Commission adds the following proviso:
"When the petitioner contends that he is unable to prove exhaustion
as indicated in this Article, it shall be up to the state against which
this petition has been lodged to demonstrate to the Commission that the
remedies under domestic law have not previously been exhausted, unless
it is clearly evident from the background information contained in the
petition. In this same
vein, the Inter-American Court made the following statement in its
preliminary exceptions in the case of Velásquez Rodríguez:
"..the state claiming non-exhaustion has an obligation to
prove that domestic remedies remain to be exhausted and that they are
Thus, following the principle of onus probandis incumbit
actoris, the State has the obligation to prove that not all recourse
has been exhausted, or failing that, to indicate which means of recourse
need to be exhausted, or why they have not taken effect.
its handling of the present case, the State of Ecuador has not contested
expressis verbis that internal recourse has already been
exhausted. On the other
hand, it reported to the Commission on the result of investigations
conducted by competent authorities in 1995--that is to say, five years
after the alleged events that are the subject of the complaint took
place. The Commission shall
therefore take it upon itself to indicate the steps that have been taken
to exhaust all means of recourse to internal legislation based on the
information provided by the parties.
her document dated November 20, 1990, attorney Martha Sánchez,
representing Víctor Rosario Congo, requested the Second Criminal Judge
of El Oro to order a psychiatric evaluation of the accused, in light of
the fact that he was suffering from a mental condition, for the purpose
of precisely determining that Mr. Rosario Congo was indeed mentally ill,
and to order his transfer to a psychiatric facility.
the absence of a response, on September 28, 1990, attorney Sánchez went
before the Fiscal Judge and claimed that Víctor Rosario Congo had been
"violated and tortured by one of the guards at the Rehabilitation
Center," and therefore asked the judge to intercede and give the
order that Mr. Rosario Congo be examined. She also asked that a
corresponding investigation be conducted to determine who was
responsible for the attacks suffered by Víctor Rosario Congo.
to the complaint, Dr. Sánchez told the Fiscal Judge that she had
previously filed a petition with the Second Criminal Judge, who was
hearing the criminal cases against Víctor Rosario Congo, requesting
that he order a psychiatric evaluation of the accused, and that no
response had been received. She
was therefore "asking for his intercession to oblige the Second
Criminal Judge to evacuate the procedure requested in the
a result of this petition, Dr. Maria Teresa Bernal, the Second Fiscal
Judge of El Oro, was authorized to order an investigation of the attacks
on Víctor Rosario Congo; as a first step, the judge ordered a medical
evaluation by medical examiners from the Office of the State Attorney
General and from the Machala Rehabilitation Center itself.
Although the medical evaluation was done, there is no record of
the corresponding investigation having been initiated with a view to
punishing the responsible parties.
State of Ecuador has not responded specifically in this regard,
completely overlooking the excessive lapse of five years that have
passed since the complainants requested an investigation of the alleged
events and the absence of any judicial action.
Meanwhile, the report that the State had sent to the Commission
on an investigation conducted between February and May 1995 had also
failed to explain the unjustified delay in the administration of
justice, such explanation being required in the event of an exception to
the prior exhaustion of all means of internal recourse pursuant to
Article 46.2(c) of the Convention and Article 37.2(c) of the Regulations
of the Commission.
the hypothesis that all internal means of recourse had not been
exhausted, the Commission nevertheless considered that since September
14, 1990, the date of the attack on Víctor Rosario Congo, much time had
passed without any decision having been reached in regard to the means
of recourse mentioned, which constitutes not only a delay on the part of
the judicial system but also a denial of justice.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights has indicated the following:
"...when certain exceptions to the rule of non-exhaustion of
domestic remedies are invoked, such as the ineffectiveness of such
remedies or the lack of due process of law, not only is it contended
that the victim is under no obligation to pursue such remedies, but,
indirectly, the state in question is also charged with a new violation
of the obligations assumed under the Convention. Thus, the question of
domestic remedies is closely tied to the merits of the case." 
However, the interposition of internal recourse in the case of Víctor
Rosario Congo was to no avail, and this placed the victim in a position
of defenselessness, which is why the Commission should hear the present
case within the framework of the exception to the rule of prior
exhaustion of means of internal recourse.
Commission considers that at this stage of analysis the question of
failure to exhaust the internal means of recourse is related to the
central issue, inasmuch as the complainants charge that there was an
absence of judicial protection with regard to the infringed rights of Víctor
Rosario Congo. For this
reason, the Commission, citing the exception to Article 46.2 (c) on the
exhaustion of means of internal recourse, will proceed with the case and
will issue its findings in due course on the substance of the question
of the petition within the period specified in the Convention
regard to the time lapse (ratione temporis), the Convention
indicates, in Article 46(b), read in conjunction with Article 38 of the
Regulations of the Commission, that the petition should be presented
within six months from the date on which the petitioner was notified of
the content of the final decision (res judicata).
Commission considers that the period of six months specified in Article
38(1) of the Regulations of the Commission for the presentation of a
complaint before the Commission, starting from the date on which the
party whose rights were presumed to have been violated has been notified
of the final decision, does not apply, inasmuch as the case falls under
the exception provided for in Article 37.2(c) of the Regulations of the
Commission, which indicates as follows:
The provisions regarding the exhaustion of means of internal
recourse shall not apply when:
There has been an unjustified delay in the decision regarding
said means of recourse.
such circumstances, Article 38.2 of the Regulations establishes that it
shall be "a reasonable period of time," in the opinion of the
Commission, starting from the date on which the presumed violation of
rights occurred, taking into account the circumstances in each specific
case. In light of the
foregoing considerations, the Commission does not disqualify itself from
hearing the present case.
of procedures at the international level
Commission concludes that the case of Víctor Rosario Congo is not
pending any other procedure at the international level, since no
exception has been invoked by the parties, nor can such be deduced from
the antecedents given in the petition. Nor does the subject of this complaint duplicate that of any
petition previously resolved by the Commission or any other
international body as per the terms of Article 47(d) of the Convention
and Article 39.1(a) and (b) of the Regulations, and accordingly the
Commission does not disqualify itself for this reason from hearing the
OFFER OF A FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT
Commission considers that the events which are the subject of the
complaint, are susceptible to being resolved through application of the
procedures for friendly settlement indicated in Article 48 (l.f) of the
Convention and in Article 45 of its Regulations, and for this reason it
places itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to seeking a
friendly settlement of the matter based on respect for human rights.
the foregoing considerations into account,
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS,
declare that Case 11.427, Víctor Rosario Congo, is admissible.
place itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to seeking a
friendly settlement of the matter based on the respect for human rights,
as recognized in the American Convention.
To this end, the parties should manifest to the Commission their
intention to initiate the procedures for amicable solution within 30
days following notification of the present report.
56. To publish the present report on admissibility in the Annual Report to the General Assembly of the OAS.