REPORT
Nº 120/01 PETITION
0122/01 ATANASIO
FRANCO CANO October
10, 2001 I. Processing by
the IACHR: The
petition was received on February 26, 2001. Receipt of the petition was
acknowledged and notice that it was being studied was sent on March 14,
2001. II. Alleged
Violations: Articles 1
and 8(1) of the Convention. III. Petitioner’s
Allegations and Arguments:
The petitioner appeared before the Paraguayan courts to request the
inheritance to which he believed himself entitled following the death of
Mrs. Cornelia Franco de Centurión. The petitioner’s complaint was that
although he was Mrs. Franco’s brother, the courts failed to recognize
him as an heir. According to the petitioner, the Court mistakenly declared
that the deceased’s heir was her nephew, Luciano Centurión Cano, who
had presented two different birth certificates. In addition, the
petitioner questioned the recognition of Lucía Franco Cano as an heir,
since she had signed a number of documents contained in the case file
despite being illiterate. Finally, the petitioner claimed that his right
of standing was annulled in the case documents and that he was
consequently excluded from the proceedings once Mr. Centurión Cano and
Mrs. Franco Cano had been recognized as the heirs. IV. IACHR’s
Analysis: The IACHR believes there is no element tending to establish a
violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. What the petitioner has
brought before the IACHR is his disagreement with the Paraguayan courts’
interpretation of certain domestic procedural rules. He also wanted the
IACHR to reassess the evidence submitted to the domestic court, to
determine the validity of birth certificates or the authenticity of
signatures on legal documents. The IACHR is not competent to review
evidence that has been assessed by local courts, unless the reported
irregularities are of such gravity as to constitute a violation of the
Convention. The petitioner has neither argued nor proven such allegations,
and a reading of the court proceedings fails to indicate such a situation.
Moreover, national courts are responsible for interpreting national
procedural laws, and the IACHR is not competent to determine the correct
interpretation of local provisions unless the interpretation in itself
constitutes a violation of the Convention. In the instant case, the
Commission does not believe that the interpretation of Paraguayan
procedural and substantive provisions made by the Paraguayan judicial
authorities constitutes a violation of the American Convention. V. Decision:
The IACHR concludes that the petition is INADMISSIBLE in that the alleged
facts do not tend to establish a violation, as required by Article 47(b)
of the American Convention. Done
and signed at the headquarters of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights on the tenth day of October, 2001. (Signed): Claudio Grossman,
President; Juan Méndez, First Vice-President; Marta Altolaguirre, Second
Vice-President; Commissioners Robert K. Goldman, Peter Laurie, and Julio
Prado Vallejo.
[ Table of Contents | Previous | Next ] |