| 
         
 
  | 
    
| 
         RESOLUTION Nº 13/83 IN
        THE MATTER OF VIVIANA GALLARDO AND OTHERS COSTA
        RICA June
        30, 1983 
 BACKGROUND:
           1.          In a
        communication dated July 31, 1981, the Secretary of the Inter-American
        Court of Human Rights reported to the Commission that the Government of
        Costa Rica had presented a case to the Court under the terms of Article
        62.3 of the American Convention on Human Rights, and remitted the
        resolution of that Court dated July 22, 1981, which, in addition to
        other matters, asked the Commission to give its points of view on the
        competence of the Court to proceed with the action of the Government of
        Costa Rica to have the Court decide whether or not Costa Rican
        authorities had violated any of the human rights protected in the Pact
        of San Jose in the case submitted to the Court in connection with the
        death of Viviana Gallardo and the injuries to her cellmates as a result
        of the actions of a member of the Civil Guard while they were detained
        in a jail of the same Guard.    2.          In a note dated
        October 13, 1981, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights notified
        the Court that no communication had been received in connection with the
        case of Viviana Gallardo and others, and confirmed that, in its opinion,
        no case may be brought to the attention of the Inter-American Court of
        Human Rights that fails to fulfill the procedures set out in Articles 48
        to 50 of the Convention and, as a consequence, those procedures must be
        exhausted before the Court may take up the case.    3.          In a
        communication dated November 16, 1981, the Inter-American Commission on
        Human Rights was informed of Resolution G1 01/81 of the Inter-American
        Court of Human Rights dated November 13, 1981, in which the Court
        decided unanimously to not hear the case initiated by the Government of
        Costa Rica to examine the case of Viviana Gallardo and Others.    The
        Commission was likewise notified of Resolution CD R1 4/81 adopted by the
        Court in which it decided to refer the matter to the Commission, in
        accordance with the collateral request made by the Government of Costa
        Rica to that effect, in the understanding that said referral implied no
        decision by the Court on the competence of the Commission.    4.          On November 24,
        1981, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights sent to the Commission
        the individual charges received in connection with the case of Viviana
        Gallardo and Others. It also attached to its note other documents
        submitted to the Court by Mrs. Vilma Camacho de Gallardo, the mother of
        Viviana Gallardo, and a telegram sent by Fernando and Rose Mary de
        Salazar, the parents of one of the cellmates of Miss Gallardo.    5.          In a note dated
        December 23, l981, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
        transmitted to the Government of Costa Rica the pertinent parts of the
        individual communications mentioned in the preceding paragraph, and
        asked it to provide all the information it considered appropriate in
        connection with the events that gave rise to the appeal to the Court, as
        well as any other observations it might consider appropriate in
        connection with the aforementioned individual communications.    6.          In that same
        note, the Commission indicated to the Government of Costa Rica that the
        request for information did not imply any decision as to the
        admissibility of the petition.    7.          In note 820169
        of February 15, 1983, the Government of Costa Rica replied to the
        Commission and attached to the same note a report on the events that
        gave rise to the appeal to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on
        the basis of information procured by staff members of the Office of the
        Procurator General of the Republic, and remitted the original letter No.
        034-81 of that same office.    8.          It also
        attached a photocopy of the Inquiry Request presented by the Fourth
        Fiscal Agent of San Jose, in representation of the Public Ministry, a
        dependent organ of the Supreme Court of Justice, and pointed out that
        the legal case being prosecuted against the alleged perpetrator of the
        crimes of qualified homicide of Viviana Gallardo, aggravated assault of
        Alejandra Bonilla and simple assault of Magaly Salazar was being brought
        to trial and that March 2, 1982, had been set for the oral and public
        presentation of evidence to the First Superior Criminal Court of San
        Jose.    9.          The Government
        of Costa Rica communicated the following: "In connection with the
        document signed by the mother of Viviana Gallardo, no specific comment
        is made because the context of the note makes it clear that the presumed
        events to which it refers are attributed to authorities or officials
        responsible for the investigation of the facts imputed to Miss Gallardo
        Camacho and others, which functions are not the responsibility of
        Executive Branch authorities but, by law, the duties of the Judicial
        Police, an agency within the sphere of the Supreme Court of
        Justice."    10.         
        Meeting in its 55th Session held in March, 1982, the
        Inter-American Commission on Human Rights conducted a study of the
        documents submitted to it for consideration by the Government of Costa
        Rica and decided to write to that government once again to request its
        observations with respect to the individual communications dealt with in
        the note of December 23, 1981, mentioned above.    11.         
        In a communication dated May 6, 1982, the Government of Costa
        Rica presented its observations about the communications submitted by
        Fernando and Rose Mary Salazar.    12.         
        On July 1, 1982, the Commission once again requested the
        Government of Costa Rica to reply to the allegations presented by Mrs.
        Vilma de Gallardo and expressed its desire to be informed of the results
        of the criminal proceedings involving the person of Corporal José
        Manuel Bolaños Quesada for the crimes of qualified homocide and
        aggravated assault. It also informed the Government of Costa Rica that
        the requests for information did not necessarily imply any decision by
        the Commission regarding the admissibility of the matter.    13.         
        In a note dated August 24, 1982, the Government of Costa Rica
        replied to the request of the Commission in which it attached two
        certifications, duly authenticated, of the verdicts handed down in the
        case against José Manuel Bolaños for the crimes of qualified homicide,
        aggravated assault and simple assault of Viviana Gallardo, Alejandra
        Bonilla and Magaly Salazar Nasser. It also reported that the 18-year
        prison sentence imposed on Mr. Bolaños was currently being served at
        the Regional Social Adaptation Center of Perez Zeledón.    14.         
        The Government of Costa Rica also reported in the note mentioned
        in the preceding paragraph the request it made to the Director of
        Judicial Investigations to conduct an investigation into the possible
        torture of Viviana Gallardo during the first days of her detention, that
        it had followed up on the findings of this investigation and that there
        had been no injury of that type. Finally, the government presented its
        observations in connection with other aspects of the individual
        communications that had been transmitted to it by the Inter-American
        Commission on Human Rights.    15.         
        The Commission considered it opportune to address Mrs. Vilma
        Camacho de Gallardo, mother of the victim, for the purpose of securing
        her observations to the reply provided by the Government of Costa Rica.
        To that end, a note dated September 13, 1982, requested such information
        from Mrs. Gallardo.    16.         
        In a letter received by the Commission on November 29, 1982, Mrs.
        Gallardo replied to the Commission and made her observations to the
        government's reply known, but did not present any new facts that would
        alter the information furnished by the Government of Costa Rica.    WHEREAS:
           1.          Article 48,
        paragraph 1, clause c) of the American Convention on Human Rights
        relating to the procedure established for the processing of individual
        communications notes that the Commission may declare the petition or
        communication inadmissible or out of order on the basis of information
        or evidence subsequently received.    2.          Article 32,
        clauses b) and c) of the Regulations of the Commission state that it is
        necessary in advance to decide on other questions related to the
        admissibility of the petition or its manifest inadmissibility based on
        the record or submission of the parties and whether grounds for the
        petition exist or subsist, and if not, to order the filed closed.    3.          From the
        evidence subsequently received by the Commission, in particular, the
        replies submitted to it for consideration by the Government of Costa
        Rica; the study of letter Nº 034-81 from the Office of the Procurator
        General of the Nation; the formal inquiry request presented by the
        fiscal agent of San Jose; the sentences handed down in the case against
        José Manuel Bolaños for the crimes of qualified homicide, aggravated
        assault and simple assault of Viviana Gallardo, Alejandra Bonilla Leiva
        and Magaly Salazar Nasser; and the investigation conducted by the
        Director of Judicial Investigations, it is clear that the Government of
        Costa Rica has acted in conformity with current legal provisions and
        punished with full force of law the person responsible for the acts
        charged.    4.          In view of the
        foregoing, the petition advanced is manifestly out of order since the
        grounds that led to its introduction no longer subsist, as required by
        Article 48, paragraph 1, clause c) of the Pact of San Jose and Articles
        32 b) and c) of the Regulations of the Inter-American Commission on
        Human Rights.    5.          The
        institutional system for the protection of human rights established in
        the Convention for the processing of petitions or communications, within
        the limits set for it, and to which the states parties have voluntarily
        agreed to abide, operates, except in cases specifically provided for in
        the Convention itself, in lieu of the domestic legal system, in
        accordance with generally recognized principles of international law.    RESOLVES:
           1.          To declare
        inadmissible the petition made in the present matter, under the terms of
        Article 48, paragraph 1, clause c), of the American Convention on Human
        Rights.    2.          To communicate
        this resolution to the Government of Costa Rica and to the
        Inter-American Court of Human Rights.    3.          To close the
        file on this matter, as provided for in Article 32 (c) of the
        Regulations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.    4.          To include this
        resolution in its Annual Report to the General Assembly in accordance
        with the terms of Article 59.(g) of the Regulations of the Commission.    Note: 
        Dr. Luis Demetrio Tinoco, a member of the Commission disqualified
        himself from this case 
  |