ANNUAL REPORT OF THE IACHR 2007

 

CHAPTER IV

CUBA (Continuation)

 

 

   V.       RESTRICTIONS OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND HARASSMENT OF
 INDEPENDENT JOURNALISTS

 

 122.     Both Article IV of the American Declaration and the first principle of the Inter-American Commission’s Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression define the right of freedom of investigation, belief, expression, and dissemination as an inherent right of all individuals. Additionally, it is an indispensable requirement for the very existence of a democratic society.[153]

 

123.          According to the case law of the inter-American system of human rights, the provisions of its leading instruments, including the American Declaration, are to be interpreted and applied in the context of developments in international human rights law, since these instruments were initially drafted with due consideration of other relevant rules of international law applicable in the member states, against which complaints of human rights violations are duly filed.[154]

 

124.          More specifically, the organs of the inter-American system have maintained that the development of the body of international human rights law relevant to the interpretation and application of the American Declaration may be extracted from the provisions of other prevailing international and regional human rights instruments.[155]  They include the American Convention on Human Rights, which is considered in many jurisdictions as the authorized expression of the fundamental principles established in the American Declaration.[156]

 

125.          Consequently, as with previous reports, the Commission will interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the American Declaration in light of the current situation of international human rights law.  More specifically, it will take into account the relevant legal provisions and case law of the inter-American system for the protection of human rights in considering the meaning and the scope of the right to freedom of expression established in Article IV of the American Declaration.

 

126.          Although the right of free expression is not absolute since, as the Inter-American Court has stated, it may be subject to restrictions, any such limitations must be set out in law and intended to protect legitimate interests. The Court has also ruled that the social dimension of the right of free expression constitutes “a way of exchanging ideas and information between persons; it includes the right to try to communicate one’s point of view to others, but it also implies everyone’s right to receive other people’s opinions, information and news.”[157]

 

127.          The Commission has repeatedly held that Cuba is the only country in the Hemisphere where it can be categorically said that there is no freedom of expression.[158]  Such statements are based essentially on the persistent problems reflected in the following conditions:  a) deprivation of personal freedom as a result of expression of opinions or criticism by journalists and dissidents; b) restrictions to the right of access to information over the Internet; c) indirect restrictions on the practice of journalism applied to the international media and correspondents; and, d) the criminalization of public demonstrations.

 

  A.       Deprivation of personal freedom as a result of the expression of opinions
or criticism by journalists and dissidents

 

128.          Over the past year, the Commission has seen that the change in Cuba’s political leadership has not brought with it any improvement in freedom of expression on the island. Cuba currently has 26 journalists in prison, with which it remains the country with the highest number of jailed reporters in the region.[159]

 

129.          The Commission notes that the State uses criminal proceedings as a way to punish and restrict the free expression of opinions. During 2007, several journalists were prosecuted and imprisoned for expressing opinions or covering matters of public interest under such vague provisions of criminal law as being a “pre-criminal danger to society.”[160]

 

130.          With regard to these definitions of criminal acts and the use of such provisions, the Commission already established in a previous report that they “[…] constitute a means of silencing ideas and opinions, as they deter any type of criticism out of fear of the punishment described above.  In the opinion of the Commission, practices of this sort affect the very essence of the right to freedom of investigation, opinion, expression, and dissemination stipulated in Article IV of the American Declaration.  The Commission further emphasizes that by virtue of the collective dimension of this right, these  provisions affect not only the persons who are punished by the Cuban courts that apply them, but also Cuban society as a whole.”[161]

 

131.          In this regard, it is important to note that this Commission has maintained that the right to freedom of expression protects “(…) not only the ‘information’ or the ‘ideas’ that are favorably received or considered inoffensive or innocuous, but also those ideas and information that offend, attack, or subvert the state or a segment of the population.  These are the requirements of pluralism, tolerance, an open mind, without which a ‘democratic society’ cannot exist.”[162]

 

132.          The Commission reaffirms that the right to freely express opinions, as well as the practice of journalism, should not be limited or punished by criminal law, since, as the Commission has clearly established in previous reports, “to accept criminal provisions that can be used to restrict free information(...) is unquestionably a serious violation of freedom of thought and expression, and especially of the right of society to receive information and control the exercise of public authority (…).”[163]

 

133.          The Commission reiterates that criminal proceedings and sentences issued on the basis of this provision, which is incompatible with the exercise of the right to freedom of investigation, opinion, expression, and dissemination, constitutes violation of Article IV of the American Declaration, inter alia, to the detriment of all the victims.[164]

 

b.         Restrictions to the right of access to information over the Internet

 

134.          Restriction to the right to access to information is an issue of concern to the Commission.  This is especially true with regard to restricted access to the Internet, the use of which is limited to government and educational institutions.  This year these restrictions were further tightened when the Cuban government announced additional limitations on use of the Internet applicable even to government employees.[165]

 

135.          On this point, the Commission has already maintained that “the right to freedom of expression includes the right to disseminate information and the right to seek and receive ideas and information.  Based on this principle, access to the information in the possession of the State is a fundamental right of individuals, and states have the obligation to guarantee it.[166]  In this regard, “guarantee of public access to information held by the State is not just a practical tool that strengthens democracy and the practice of human rights and promotes socio-economic justice, but it is also a human right protected by international law.[167]

 

136.          Principle 4 of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression states that “access to information held by the state is a fundamental right of every individual.  States have the obligation to guarantee the full exercise of this right.  This principle allows only exceptional limitations that must be previously established by law in case of a real and imminent danger that threatens national security in democratic societies.”

 

137.          With regard to the Internet, it is worth repeating that it “[...] is an instrument that is capable of strengthening the democratic system, contributing to the economic development of the countries of the region, and strengthening the full exercise of freedom of expression.  The Internet represents a technology unprecedented in the history of communications, that provides for rapid access and transmission to a universal network of multiple and varied information.  Maximizing citizens’ active participation by promoting use of the Internet contributes to the political, social, cultural, and economic development of countries, and strengthens democratic society.  The Internet in turn has the potential to be an ally in promoting and disseminating human rights and democratic ideals and a significant tool for activating human rights organizations, since its speed and scope make it possible to transmit and receive immediately situations affecting the fundamental rights of individuals in different regions of the world.”[168]

 

138.          In view of the foregoing considerations, the Commission concludes that restrictions to Internet access constitute a violation of the right of access to information, to the detriment of the Cuban people.

 

c.         Indirect restrictions to the practice of journalism imposed on international social communicators and correspondents

 

139.          The Commission also observed with concern the steps taken by the Cuban State towards international correspondents and journalists.  This year, it learned of cases in which foreign reporters who were covering events of public interest in Cuba were stripped of their permit to work in the country.  The State justified this action by alleging that “their assessment of Cuban problems is not acceptable to the Cuban Government,” or that the work of these journalists “is negative.”[169]

 

140.          In this regard, it is important to note that Principle 5 of the Inter-American Commission’s Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression specifically prohibits indirect restrictions on any expression, opinion, or information, which frequently involve the use of legitimate mechanisms in a discriminatory or abusive way, as a way of rewarding or punishing journalists or other persons for their statements.[170]

 

141.          The Commission considers that the cancellation of foreign press or media permits imposes illegitimate restrictions on the practice of journalism, and is contrary to the standards established in the inter-American system.  In addition to being an indirect means of restricting the work of these international news correspondents, it can have an inhibiting effect on other social communicators, by dissuading them from issuing criticism and commenting on matters of public interest, which is clearly counter to the provisions of Article IV of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man.

 

d.         Criminalization of public demonstrations

 

142.          Finally, the Commission is concerned over the action taken to repress social demonstrations.[171]  In this regard, the Commission has learned of arrests made during public demonstrations in support of respect for fundamental rights.[172]  The persons arrested have included reporters and their family members.[173]

 

143.          The Commission points out that “participation of societies through public demonstrations is important to strengthen the democratic life of societies.  Generally speaking, as a manifestation of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, it plays a key social role, which leaves the state little room to justify a restriction of this right.[174]

 

144.          Although the State has the right and obligation to maintain order and public security, it is essential that this power be exercised with limits and in strict observance of the right of citizens to air their opinions in peaceful ways.[175]

 

145.          Lastly, while recognizing the power of states to maintain public order, the Commission finds it necessary to stress that the peaceful expression of opinions opposing those of the Cuban government should not be criminalized.  States may regulate freedom of expression and freedom of assembly to protect the rights of others.  However, when it comes time to strike a balance between the right of passage, for instance, and the right of assembly, it is appropriate to bear in mind that the right to freedom of expression is not just one more right, but is rather one of the first and most important underpinnings of the entire democratic structure.  Failure to respect freedom of expression has a direct adverse effect on the nerve center of the democratic system.[176]

 

VI.        HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS

 

146.          The IACHR has received reports about incidents involving harassment, attacks, and threats against human rights defenders, particularly those who work to defend jailed political dissidents. For example, the IACHR received information about the alleged arrest, carried out with excessive use of force, of Mr. Juan Carlos González Leiva, executive secretary of the Cuban Council of Human Rights Rapporteurs and president of the Cuban Human Rights Foundation, as he was preparing to interview the son of political dissident José Antonio Mola Porro.[177]

 

147.          In addition, the IACHR sees with particular concern that human rights defenders are systematically discredited in their work defending and promoting human rights in Cuba.[178] The IACHR therefore again stresses the need to take the steps necessary to ensure that state agencies are not used to harass those who work to defend and promote human rights, particularly those measures described in the “Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas.”

 

VII.       SITUATION OF TRADE UNION LEADERS

 

148.          According to the American Declaration, every person has the right to work,[179] to assemble peaceably,[180]  and to associate with others to promote, exercise, and protect his legitimate interests.[181]  As regards freedom of association, the Commission reiterates its concern over the existence of a single officially recognized trade union referred to in Cuban legislation, which has been the focus of the ongoing attention of the International Labor Organization.  The Commission would emphasize that one of the guiding principles of the Constitution of the International Labor Organization, of which Cuba is a signatory, is “recognition of the principle of the right to form a union” as an essential requirement for “universal peace and harmony.”

 

149.          During 2007, the IACHR continued to receive information on the human rights situation of workers and union leaders in Cuba. Most of those reports dealt with restrictions on the right of union freedom.

 

150.          At the public hearing on the situation of jailed union members in Cuba[182] held on July 20, 2007, the IACHR received information about the serious restrictions in place on union freedom in Cuba and about the arbitrary prosecution of independent trade unionists who have been sentenced to prison terms of between 13 and 25 years for expressing anti-government opinions: Pedro Pablo Álvarez Ramos was sentenced to 25 years; Horacio Julio Piña Borrego, to 20 years; Carmelo Díaz Fernández, to 16 years; Oscar Espinosa Chepe, to 20 years; Víctor Rolando Arroyo Carmona, to 26 years; Adolfo Fernández Sainz, to 15 years; Alfredo Felipe Fuentes, to 26 years; Luis Milán Fernández, to 13 years; and Blas Giraldo Reyes Rodríguez, to 25 years.

 

151.          The Commission believes that the harassment of trade unionists working to defend the right of union freedom is a breach of human rights.[183]

 

VIII.      ECONOMIC SANCTIONS

 

152.          The IACHR has on repeated occasions spoken about the grave impact on the economic and social rights of the Cuban people caused by the economic, commercial, and financial embargo imposed on Cuba in 1961.[184] It therefore insists that the embargo must be lifted. Irrespective of that, however, the economic embargo in place on Cuba does not free the State of its duty of meeting its international obligations, nor does it excuse it for the violations of the American Declaration described in this report.

 

153.          The Commission again stresses the responsibility of the inter-American community in creating the external conditions necessary for Cuban society to overcome the situation currently affecting it and to attain full observance of human rights. The IACHR believes that “the adverse effects of the economic sanctions and other unilateral measures aimed at isolating the Cuban regime constitute an obstacle to creating those conditions that are so necessary for achieving a peaceful and gradual transition to a democratic form of government.”[185]

 

IX.        CONCLUSIONS

 

154.          In light of the above remarks, the Commission again states that restrictions on political rights, on freedom of expression, and on the dissemination of ideas, the failure to hold elections, and the absence of an independent judiciary in Cuba combine to create a permanent panorama of breached basic rights for the Cuban citizenry, and it urges the State to undertake the necessary reforms in accordance with its international human rights obligations.

 

155.          The Commission urges the State of Cuba to bring its procedures into line with international standards of due process, to ensure that individuals who have recourse to the courts in order to determine their rights and responsibilities enjoy minimum legal guarantees in exercising their defense.

 

156.          The Commission also reiterates to the State of Cuba its recommendation of ordering the immediate and unconditional release of the victims in Case 12.476, and of voiding their convictions on the grounds that they were based on laws that illegitimately restrict human rights.

 

157.          Finally, the Commission urges the Cuban State to take the steps necessary to prevent and eradicate the different forms of harassment used against individuals who exercise the right of association for humanitarian and trade union purposes and against those persons who dedicate their efforts to the defense and promotion of human rights.

 

DISSENTING VOTE BY COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ

 

Explanation of vote.

I do not agree with the inclusion of Cuba in Chapter IV of the 2007 Report for the following reasons:

 

It is unconceivable that deeds expounded in an abstract, general, and vague manner, recounted by one side only and expressing a single, exclusive point of view, with no possibility, past or present, of being contested, for which the sources are dubious, and which are, one should add, taken from media that systematically oppose the right of the Republic of Cuba freely to determine its own destiny as well as its right not to accept outside interference, should induce the Commission to declare a case admissible without it meeting the requirements stipulated in the American Convention, and, even worse, that it be included in Chapter IV of the Commission’s Report.

 

The legal basis on which the description of the deeds rests is flimsy and insubstantial, particularly since it invokes the American Declaration of 1948 and the Rules of Procedure of the IACHR. There is no universally accepted doctrine nor peaceful jurisprudence regarding the Declaration, given that, by definition, it involves adherence to certain values and general principles, which are important but contained in imperfect norms that establish no punishments, which therefore relativizes the greater or lesser commitment of states in accepting the enunciation of the rights enshrined therein. The Declaration has played an enormously valuable part in the history of civilization, and its contents have to concur with the American Convention, but it is not licit to use it circumstantially against a state that has even been denied the possibility of accounting for its departure from or approximation to the values it once ratified.

 

Moreover, as I have consistently stated, the operating Rules of Procedure of the Commission constitute by their nature a sub-legal act, which is binding upon the Commissioners in the performance of their tasks and functions, but which may never be construed as an international norm based on pacta sunt servanda and therefore to be applied obligatorily by the states parties to the American Convention. Indeed, it is inexplicable and incomprehensible in the interpretation of law that rules of procedure, resolutions, or instructions of a sub-legal nature could create duties, rights, and even punishments for states that have not agreed to their contents.  It is necessary to emphasize that the states are parties to the American Convention and to the Commission’s Statute, and are therefore bound by what they agreed to, but they cannot be bound by what they legitimately did not agree to. This is the case of the Rules of Procedure, the contents of which were not examined, discussed, or ratified by the member states of the hemispheric Organization.  This applies with even greater force to the Republic of Cuba, which was not allowed to be a state party to the Convention, or to discuss the Statute, and has no inkling of the existence of Rules of Procedure that might, apparently, be the basis for some sanction against it.

 

Perhaps the most serious misapprehension is the failure to refer to the expulsion of the Republic of Cuba agreed upon by the Organization of American States in 1962.  Since then, Cuba cannot validly nominate anyone to a position of responsibility within the hemispheric Organization, have either voice or vote, elect or be elected, or exercise any right at all.  It is therefore an aberration in fact and in law to seek to scrutinize and even condemn the acts of one who has been denied the exercise of his basic powers, of the rights that are intrinsic to a people, and the rights that are also intrinsic to the men and women who constitute that people.

 

It is also contrary to any sound interpretation of the law to seek to initiate, pursue, and issue a condemnation of someone who cannot defend himself. It is contrary to the rules of due process contained in the American Convention, the pillar upon which the Commission stands, that the Republic of Cuba, which is not cognizant of the contents of any notification, cannot make itself heard, cannot argue in its defense, cannot contradict the statements of someone calling himself a party, and which has even been denied the right to be a counterparty, should be condemned. I should not omit the fact that this act of the Commission concerns the Annual Report of the Commission, which highlights states which systematically violate human rights.  Out of bias, Cuba is not recognized as one of the countries with the lowest infant mortality rate; as one of those with the highest education indicators, revealing the presence in our Hemisphere of a well-educated people; as a country with the best health indicators in the world.  Cuba does not suffer, moreover from the prison violence that, as the whole world knows, besets the jails in Guantánamo or any of the countries in Central and South America.  Nor is it recognized that Cuba typically contributes in various ways to raising the standard of living of the people inhabiting our planet.  Cuba has achieved these exceptional conditions thanks to enormous effort, despite being besieged, despite being the victim of a blockade that is unacceptable to humankind, as was recognized recently in the United Nations General Assembly. I harbor the hope that one day the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights will atone for its unfairness to Cuba and recognize its adherence to the values and principles that inform human rights.

 

The foregoing arguments explain my dissenting vote in the matter at hand.

 


[TABLE OF CONTENTS  |  PREVIOUSNEXT]
 


[153] IACHR, Annual Report 2005; Volume II, Report of the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression 2005. Chapter II, The Situation of the Freedom of Expression in the Hemisphere; B. Situation of the freedom of expression in the Member States, Cuba, para. 60.

[154] IACHR, Report Nº 68/06. Case 12.477. Merits. Lorenzo Enrique Copello Castillo et al., Cuba, October 21, 2006 para. 50. See Inter-American Court, Advisory Opinion 16/99, The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of Due Legal Process, Series A, N° 16 (1999) (hereinafter “Advisory Opinion 16/99”), para. 114.  See Report N° 52/02, Case 11.753, Ramón Martínez Villareal (United States), para. 60.  See also the American Convention, Article 29(b) (“No provision of this Convention shall be interpreted as: [. . .] b. restricting the enjoyment or exercise of any right or freedom recognized by virtue of the laws of any State Party or by virtue of another convention to which one of the said states is a party“).

[155] IACHR, Report Nº 68/06. Case 12.477. Merits. Lorenzo Enrique Copello Castillo et al, Cuba, October 21, 2006 para. 51. See also the Inter-American Court, Advisory Opinion 10/89, Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, within the framework of Article 64 of the American Convention on Human Rights, July 14, 1989, Series A, N° 10 (1989) (hereinafter “Advisory Opinion 10/89”), para. 37.

[156] IACHR, Report Nº 68/06. Case 12.477. Merits. Lorenzo Enrique Copello Castillo et al., Cuba, October 21, 2006 para.   51. See also IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights of Persons Seeking Asylum within the Canadian System for Determining the Status of Refugee, Doc. Doc. OA/Ser.L/V/II.106, doc. 40 rev. (February 28, 2000).

[157] I/A Court H. R., Case of Ricardo Canese. Judgment of August 31, 2004. Series C Nº 111, paragraph 79.

[158] IACHR, 2004 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Volume II, Chapter IV, paragraph 84. Also refer to IACHR Report Nº 67/06, Case 12476. Merits; Oscar Elías Bicet et al., Cuba. October 21, 2006, para. 189.

[159] Committee to Protect Journalists; “CPJ urges acting president of Cuba to immediately release all jailed journalists”; published March 14, 2007; available at: http://www.cpj.org/protests/07ltrs/americas/cuba14mar07pl.html.

[160] Reporters Without Borders, “Journalist sentenced to four years in prison as ‘pre-criminal social danger’”; published April 18, 2007; available at: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=21793. See also PEN: “Cuba: Oscar Sánchez Madan sentenced to four years; fourth Cuban journalist to be jailed as ‘pre-criminal danger to society’ in the last six months.” Press release dated May 2, 2007, available at: http://www.englishpen.org/writersinprison/bulletins/cuba oscarsnchezmadansentencedtofouryearsfourthcubanjournalisttobejailedaspre-criminaldangertosocietyinthelastsixmonths/.

[161] IACHR Report Nº 67/06, Case 12.476. Merits; Oscar Elías Biscet et al., Cuba. October 21, 2006, para. 209.

[162] IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights,, OAS/Ser.L/V/II. 116 Doc. 5 rev corr., October 22, 2002;
para. 269.

[163] IACHR, Report Nº 20/99, Case 11.317 (Rodolfo Robes Espinoza and Sons). Peru, February 23, 1999,
para. 153.

[164] IACHR, Report Nº 67/06,Case 12.476, Merits:  Oscar Elías Biscet et al. Cuba, October 21, 2006, para. 210.

[165] Reporters without Borders, “Reaction of Reporters without Borders to statements by the Minister of Communications regarding the Internet,” published on February 14, 2007, available at: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=21002.

[166] IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights, OAS/Ser.L/V/II. 116 Doc. 5 rev. corr., October 22, 2002;
para. 281.

[167] IACHR, 2003 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Volume III , Report of the Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Chapter IV, Report on Access to Information in the Hemisphere, para. 8.

[168] IACHR, 1999 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Chapter II, Evaluation of the Status of Freedom of Expression in the Hemisphere, the Internet and Freedom of Expression.

[169] Committee to Protect Journalists; “CPJ condemns Cuba’s decision to ban three foreign correspondents”; published on February 23, 2007, available at http://www.cpj.org/news/2007/americas/cuba23feb07na.html. Also refer to Reporters Without Borders, “Two foreign reporters declared persona non grata and ordered to leave the island,” Press Release of February 23, 2007, available at: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=21102. Inter-American Press Association, IAPA condemns suspension of the press credentials of foreign correspondents in Cuba, Press Release of February 23, 2007, available at: http://www.sipiapa.com/espanol/pressreleases/srchcountrydetail. cfm?PressReleaseID=1859.

[170] 2002 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Volume III, Report of the Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Chapter III, Case Law; A. Summary of Inter-American Case Law on Freedom of Expression,
para. 37.

[171] Reporters without Borders, “Wave of detentions among dissidents: six reporters arrested in twenty-four hours,” published on September 28, 2007, available at http://www.rsf.org/imprimir.php3?id_article=23810. Also refer to Reporters without Borders, “Twenty-fifth reporter detained: relentless repression of the independent press,” published on February 5, 20077, available at: http://www.rsf.org/archives-es.php3?id_rubrique=60&annee=2007.

[172] Reporters Without Borders, “Oleada de detenciones entre la disidencia: detenidos seis periodistas durante veinticuatro horas”; published on September 28, 2007; disponible en http://www.rsf.org/imprimir.php3?id_article=23810. See also Reporters Without Borders, “Tras 19 meses de detención sin juicio, al periodista Roberto de Jesús Guerra Pérez le han condenado a 22 meses de cárcel” published on February 28, 2007, available at: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=21134.

[173] Reporters without Borders, “Wave of detentions among dissidents: six reporters arrested in twenty-four hours,” published on September 28, 2007, available at http://www.rsf.org/imprimir.php3?id_article=23810. Also refer to Reporters without Borders, “Twenty-fifth reporter detained: relentless repression of the independent press,” published on February 5, 20077, available at: http://www.rsf.org/archives-es.php3?id_rubrique=60&annee=2007.

[174] IACHR, 2005 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Vol. II, Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Chapter V. Public Demonstrations as a Manifestation of Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Assembly, para. 91.

[175] IACHR, 2005 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Vol. II, Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Chapter V. Public Demonstrations as a Manifestation of Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Assembly.

[176] IACHR, 2005 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Vol. II, Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Chapter V. Public Demonstrations as a Manifestation of Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Assembly, para. 93.

[177] World Organisation Against Torture, “Recent acts of harassment against Mr. Juan Carlos González Leiva,” CUB 001/0807/OBS103, August 30, 2007.

[179] American Declaration, Article XIV.

[180] Id., Article XXI.

[181] Id., Article XXII.

[182] See: Video of public hearing on “Situation of the union members deprived of liberty in Cuba,” held on July 20, 2007, cited above.

[183] IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124/Doc. 5 rev.1, March 7, 2006, paragraphs 209 to 214.

[184] On October 30, 2007, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/62/3 on the “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba.” See: www.un.org.

[185] IACHR, Annual Report 1999: Situation of Human Rights in Cuba, Chapter IV, paragraph 64, April 13, 2000; IACHR, Annual Report 2000: Situation of Human Rights in Cuba, Chapter IV, paragraph 92, April 16, 2001; IACHR, Annual Report 2005: Situation of Human Rights in Cuba, Chapter IV, paragraph 117, February 27, 2006; IACHR, Annual Report 2006: Situation of Human Rights in Cuba, Chapter IV, paragraph 85, March 3, 2007.