OEA/Ser.L/V/II.74
doc. 10 rev.1
16 September 1988
Original:  Spanish

ANNUAL  REPORT OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION
ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1987-1988

CHAPTER II

ACTIVITIES OF THE IACHR

During the period covered in this report, the Commission conducted the following activities:

1.                  Sessions

As of September 1987, the IACHR has held two sessions (71st and 72nd), on the following dates:  September 14 through 25, 1987, and March 15 through 25, 1988.

The Commission also held a Special Session (73rd) at the headquarters of the General Secretariat of the Organization in Washington, D.C., May 9 through 11, 1988, to consider the opinion it would emit regarding amnesty for the former members of the Nicaraguan National Guard, pursuant to point 3, paragraph 3, of the Sapoá Agreement (1988).

a.                 Seventy-first session

At this session, after studying the Paraguayan Government’s observations on the (preliminary) Report, approved at the Commission’s 70th session (June-July 1987), cited earlier, the IACHR gave final approval to that document and referred it to the OAS General Assembly by way of its Preparatory Committee.

It also approved its Annual Report to the General Assembly (1986-87).1  In that report, reference is made to the situation of human rights in Cuba, Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Nicaragua and Suriname.  The report also includes a chapter on the areas in which measures should be taken to ensure the observance of human rights in the member states of the Organization and the text of the resolutions approved on individual cases during the Commission’s sessions.

In a special press communique released on September 24, 1987, the IACHR expressed its view on the Chilean Government’s signing of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture on that same date.  In one part of that communique, the Commission states that “it is awaiting an invitation from the Government of Chile to conduct an on-site investigation, as early as possible, of the cases of torture that the Commission has before it, so as to comply thereby with Article 17 of the Convention that the Chilean Government is signing today.”

The IACHR continued to monitor the human rights situation in Haiti during this session, and decided again to address itself to the Government of Haiti to express its concern over the physical attacks made upon several Catholic priests on August 23, 1987, in Port-au-Prince.

During that session, the Commission examined the situation in Central American as it affects the observance of human rights in the region, in the light of the Esquipulas Agreements of August 1987.  Its decision was to monitor developments in the area and to conduct an on-site visit to Nicaragua, which had given its permission for the visit.  It also decided to send a subcommission to conduct an on-site fact-finding mission to Guatemala.

The IACHR considered and adopted decisions on various complaints then in process, and conveyed the findings on the case to the interested parties and governments.  It had hearings with individuals and groups that had asked to be heard on matters related to the human rights situation in various countries of this Hemisphere.

b.                 Seventy-second Session

During this session, the new officers of the Commission were elected and took office:  President, Mr. Marco Tulio Bruni Celli; First Vice President, Ms. Elsa Kelly; Second Vice President, Mr. John Stevenson.

The Commission began its study of the draft Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Sanction the Forced Disappearance of Persons, prepared pursuant to a mandate from the General Assembly at its seventeenth regular session (November 1987).  Further, in compliance with a mandate from the General Assembly, it has undertaken a study on the situation of minors who are children of individuals who have disappeared and who are being claimed by their blood relatives.

At this session, the Commission decided to prepare a report on the human rights situation in Haiti, confident that the Government of that country would invite it to conduct an observation in Haitian territory.

At the seventy-second session, attention was also given to the human rights situation in Central America.  It first received the report of the Special Committee that visited Nicaragua in January 1988 to analyze the status of the proceedings on 50 cases currently in process and to become familiar with various aspects of human rights.

As stated in a press communique released in Managua on January 23, 1988, the Commission’s visit enabled it to inform itself on various aspects of the complex human rights situation.  The IACHR thanked the Government of Nicaragua for the invitation and the facilities and courtesies afforded during its mission, and expressed the hope that it might be able to return to resolve the cases currently before it and situations of a general nature, which are a source of concern to the IACHR.

Furthermore, the Commission considered the Sapoá Agreement which sets forth a rule for the Commission in the release of former members of the National Guard and other political prisoners in Nicaragua.  In its press release at the end of the seventy-second session, it stated that it was “ready to do everything possible, within its limited means, to discharge such an important and so difficult a task.”

During the course of that same session, the IACHR received the Report of the Special Committee that visited Guatemala in January 1988.  The Commission sent a communication to the President of Guatemala thanking him for the facilities provided and set forth a number of recommendations to respond to the problems and to surmount the difficulties threatening the situation of fundamental human rights in Guatemala.

The Commission received the report of the Special Commission that conducted an on-site observation of the situation of human rights and the democratization process in Suriname in October 1987.  The Special Commission had travelled to French Guyana to visit the Surinamese refugee camps.  The IACHR decided to continue its study of human rights in Suriname and to monitor any measures that might be taken by the Government in this respect.  Details of the visit appear further on.

In order to consider the processing of individual cases in El Salvador, the IACHR at its 72nd session decided to request the Government’s permission for a further inspection visit to that country.  The request was sent to the Salvadoran Government on March 23, 1998.

Other countries:  At its 72nd session, the Commission considered various petitions concerning alleged violations of human rights in OAS member countries, whether parties to the American Convention or otherwise; and it approved the corresponding decisions and resolutions, instructing that they be forwarded to the respective petitioners and governments.  Statements were also received from representatives of the parties, the petitioners, and representatives of governments that wished to be heard about the situation of human rights.

c.                 Seventh-third session

The IACHR held a special session from May 9 through May 11, 1988 to consider the amnesty provisions set forth in Point 3, paragraph 3 of the Sapoá Agreement (February 1988).

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 41, subsection e of the American Convention on Human Rights, at that session the Commission approved the document entitled “Recommendations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Response to the Request Formulated in Point 3, paragraph 3 of the Sapoá Agreement,” which was then sent on May 11, 1988 to the Secretary General of the Organization of American States for the corresponding measures.

2.                  Seventeenth regular session of the OAS General Assembly

The General Assembly of the Organization held its seventeenth regular session at OAS headquarters in Washington, D.C. from November 9 through November 14, 1987.

Complying with Article 18 (f) of its Statute and Article 39 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, the Commission submitted its 1986-1987 Annual Report, approved at its 71st session, held in Washington, D.C., September 14-24, 1987 to the Assembly.

The Report consisted of five chapters, summarizing, respectively:  the origin, juridical bases and structure of the IACHR; its activities; its decisions on individual cases; the human rights situation in countries of the Americas; and, finally, the areas in which steps need to be taken for full observance of human rights, followed by a number of pertinent recommendations made by the IACHR.

At that time, in addition to considering the Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Paraguay and electing four members of the Commission (Mr. Patrick Robinson, of Jamaica; Ms. Gilda Russomano, of Brazil; Mr. John Stevenson, of the United States; and Mr. Leo Valladares Lanza, of Honduras) to four-year terms, the General Assembly approved the IACHR budget for the 1988-89 biennium.

Commission President Gilda Russomano presented the IACHR Annual Report–which had been approved at its previous (71st) session–to the First Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs, and the First Vice President, Mr. Bruni Celli presented the Commission’s special Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Paraguay.  The Commission officers were accompanied and assisted by Executive Secretary Edmundo Vargas Carreño and other members of the Commission’s Secretariat.

The seventeenth regular session of the General Assembly also considered the following topics pertaining to the Commission’s activities:

a.       Draft Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in respect of economic, social, and cultural rights;

b.       Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights relative to the abolition of the death penalty; and

c.       The Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

The General Assembly approved the IACHR proposal for preparation of a draft inter-American convention on the prevention and punishment of forced disappearances, requesting the governments of the member states to submit their observations and comments on this initiative prior to June 30, 1988.

The OAS General Assembly approved the resolutions corresponding to the aforementioned topics, the texts of which appear on the following pages.1

AG/RES. 887 (XVII-O/87)

DRAFT ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE

AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

(Resolution adopted at the tenth plenary session,

held on November 14, 1987)

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,

 

HAVING SEEN the report of the Permanent Council on the status of work accomplished on the draft Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights relevant to economic, social, and cultural rights (AG/doc.2189/87); and

 

CONSIDERING:

 

That Article 77 of the American Convention on Human Rights provides that, at the request of any state party or the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the General Assembly may consider draft protocols to the aforementioned Convention, with a view to gradually including other rights and freedoms within its system of protection;

 

That, through resolution AG/RES. 836 (XVI-O/86), the General Assembly took note of the draft Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights relevant to economic, social, and cultural rights presented by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and transmitted it to the governments of the states parties to the American Convention on Human Rights in order that they might make observations and comments thereon so that the Permanent Council, in light of those observations and comments and of any other information it considered appropriate, might submit proposals on the subject to the General Assembly at its seventeenth regular session;

 

That, pursuant to the aforementioned resolution, a considerable number of states parties to the American Convention on Human Rights have made observations and comments on the aforementioned draft Additional Protocol; and

 

That, notwithstanding the significant progress made by the Permanent Council, the analysis of the draft Protocol presented by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has not yet been completed,

 

RESOLVES:

 

To request the Permanent Council, on the basis of the draft presented by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and taking into account the observations and comments made by the governments of the states parties to the aforementioned Convention as well as any other information it may deem appropriate, to present to the General Assembly at its eighteenth regular session a draft Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights relevant to economic, social, and cultural rights or such instruments as it may deem appropriate, so that they may be considered with a view to their adoption.

 

AG/RES. 889 (XVII-O/87)

ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN

RIGHTS TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY

(Resolution adopted at the tenth plenary session,

held on November 14, 1987)

 

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,

 

HAVING SEEN the initiative presented by the Government of Uruguay for the adoption of an Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights under which the States Parties would proscribe the application of the death penalty, as well as the recommendation to that effect made by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in its Annual Report; and

 

CONSIDERING:

 

That a large number of States Parties to the American Convention on human Rights have abolished the death penalty in their domestic laws and that trend suggests that rules to prohibit the death penalty should be set down in a special instrument; and

 

That it is necessary to develop the restrictive formula concerning the death embodied in Article 4 of the American Convention on Human Rights, thereby following the current trend in comparative law embodied in the Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits the application of the death penalty,

 

RESOLVES:

 

          1.          To request the governments of the States Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights to submit before June 30, 1988, their observations in respect of the adoption of an Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to prohibit the death penalty.

 

          2.          To instruct the Permanent Council to submit to the General Assembly at its eighteenth regular session a draft additional protocol to the aforementioned Convention that would prohibit the application of the death penalty, and should be based on the initiative of the Government of Uruguay and the draft presented by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in its Annual Report, as well as on the observations presented by the States Parties.

AG/RES. 890 (XVII-O/87)

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

(Resolution adopted at the tenth plenary session,

held on November 14, 1987)

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,

 

HAVING SEEN the Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (AG/doc.2166/87) and the Report on the Status of Human Rights in Paraguay (AG/doc.2152/87) and the comments and replies of the governments (AG/doc.2159/87); and

 

CONSIDERING:

 

That, in the Charter of the Organization of American States, the member states have declared that respect for the fundamental rights of the individual, without distinction as to race, nationality, creed, or sex, is one of the principles of the Organization;

 

That the principal purpose of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights is to promote the observance and defense of human rights, a noble mission with which all the states of the region and the organs and bodies of the inter-American system should cooperate;

 

That the democratic system is essential to the establishment of a political society wherein human rights can be fully realized;

 

That, in its Annual Report, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights underscored, as positive signs, the return to representative democracy by several states as well as the measures adopted by certain countries to contribute significantly to observance of the rights set forth in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and in the American Convention on Human Rights;

 

That, despite the foregoing, the Annual Report of the Commission points out the persistence of serious violations of basic rights and freedoms in certain countries, especially because of inadequate or negative measures being adopted by the governments of those countries with regard to reestablishing a representative democratic form of government;

 

That, finally, the Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights made specific reference to the dramatic situation of children who have disappeared with their parents or were born during the captivity of their mothers and are still in the hands of their captors;

 

That in its Annual Report the Commission has stated that using the issue of human rights as an instrument of political struggle is a gross distortion of the international juridical system on human rights and an obstacle to the effective observance and promotion of human rights;

 

That effective defense and promotion of human rights demands the objectivity necessary to prevent human rights from being used as an instrument of political or ideological confrontation; and

 

That, without prejudice to the detailed examination of the various activities carried out each year by the Commission in the exercise of its mandates under the various inter-American instruments, special attention should be given at the annual sessions of the General Assembly to situations of serious, massive, or systematic violations of human rights,

 

RESOLVES:

 

          1.          To note with interest the Annual Report and the recommendations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and to express appreciation and congratulations for the serious and vital work it is doing to protect and promote human rights.

 

          2.          To urge the governments of the states mentioned in the Annual Report to adopt the corresponding recommendations of the commission, in accordance with their constitutional precepts and domestic laws, in order to guarantee faithful observance of the human rights set forth in the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man and the American Convention on Human Rights.

 

          3.          To express its concern over the persistence of serious violations of fundamental rights and freedoms in several countries of the region.

 

          4.          To take note of the comments and observations made by the governments of the member states and of the information on the measures they have adopted and will continue to implement in order to strengthen human rights in their countries.

 

          5.          To note with satisfaction the decision of the governments of the member states that have invited the Commission to visit their respective countries and to urge the governments of the states that have not yet agreed to or set a date for such visits to do so as soon as possible.

 

          6.          To reiterate to those governments that have not yet reinstated the representative democratic form of government that it is urgently necessary to implement the pertinent institutional machinery to restore such a system in the shortest possible time, through free and open elections held by secret ballot, since democracy is the best guarantee of the full exercise of human rights and is the firm foundation of the solidarity among the states of the Hemisphere.

 

          7.          To recommend to the governments of the member states that they grant the necessary guarantees and facilities to nongovernment human rights organizations so that they may continue to contribute to the promotion and defense of human rights, and that said governments respect the freedom and security of the leaders of such organizations.

 

          8.          To recommend to the member states that are not parties to the American Convention on Human Rights, or Pact of San José, Costa Rica, of 1969, that they ratify or accede to that instrument and, to those states that do not recognize the competence of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to receive and examine interstate communications pursuant to Article 45 (3) of the Convention or do not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in accordance with Article 62 (2) of the aforementioned Convention, that they do so.

 

          9.          To encourage the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in its ongoing efforts in the defense of human rights in the region, for which purpose it has the unequivocal support of the democratic governments of the Organization.

 

          10.          To request the Commission to include on its next program of activities a study on the situation of minors who are the children of disappeared persons and who have been separated from their parents and are being claimed by members of their legitimate families.

 

          11.          To invite the member countries to submit to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, by June 30, 1988, observations and comments on its positive initiative aimed at producing a draft inter-American convention to prevent and punish forced disappearances, so that the Commission might submit a draft convention on this subject to the General Assembly at its next regular session.

3.                  On-site observation and visits made by the Commission

a.                 Visits to Suriname

In July 1987, IACHR Assistant Executive Secretary Dr. David Padilla went to Suriname to make preparations for the Commission’s visit scheduled for October 1987, pursuant to its decision at the 70^th session (June-July 1997).  During his stay, Dr. Padilla interviewed high government officials and individuals and groups associated with human rights.

A special Committee chaired by Mr. Oliver Jackman visited Suriname to conduct an on-site investigation of the human rights situation, October 5-9, 1987.  Upon completion of its work, the IACHR issued a detailed press release on its activities during that visit, such as the interviews with high government authorities, including Suriname President Ramdat Misier, and the Minister of Justice.  It also gave details of the criteria and preliminary recommendations concerning human rights problems in that country, particularly the electoral process; and the concern over individuals who had been detained for long periods without specific charges.  Finally, the IACHR expressed its appreciation for the consent and facilities granted for the visit and stated that it would continue to address the country’s human rights situation.

b.                 Visit to Guatemala

A Special Committee chaired by Mr. Marco Tulio Bruni Celli, the Commission’s First Vice President at the time, visited Guatemala to conduct an investigation in situ of the situation of human rights from January 25 through January 28, 1988. 

As a result of its visit, the Special Committee submitted a restricted report (OEA/Ser.L/V/II.72, doc.13, rev.).

At its 72nd session (March 1988), the Commission also decided to thank the Government of Guatemala for the facilities provided during its visit; at the same time it presented several recommendations concerning human rights, particularly concerning the right of individuals to freedom and security.

c.                 Visits to Nicaragua

A Sub-Commission of the IACHR visited Nicaragua January 20-22, 1988, having received consent from the Government to review the situation of certain pending individual cases and to acquaint itself with other aspects of the human rights situation there.  The Sub-Commission was chaired by Mr. Marco Tulio Bruni Celli, the First vice President at that time, and Mr. Edmundo Vargas Carreño, Executive Secretary, who were accompanied by members of the Secretariat.

At the end of the visit a press release was issued describing the Sub-Commission’s activities, including interviews with high government officials, the National Commission on Human Rights, representatives of opposition political parties, and individuals and groups concerned with the protection of human rights.  The Commission also visited jails such as the protection of human rights.  The Commission also visited jails such as Tipitapa Penitentiary and other detention centers where political prisoners were being held.  The Statement included an expression of thanks to the Nicaraguan Government for the facilities it had provided for a successful visit.

The Provisions of point 3 of the Sapoá Agreement, signed by representatives of the Government of Nicaragua and the National Resistance Movement on March 23, 1988, include the following paragraphs:

The Government of Nicaragua will decree a general amnesty … for members of the army of the previous regime for crimes committed before July 19, 1979.

In the case of the prisoners mentioned in the final part of the first paragraph of this numeral, their release will begin at the moment of signing a definitive cease-fire, following judgment by the Inter-American Human Rights Commission of the Organization of American States.

The Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS) shall be guarantor and depository for the compliance of this amnesty.

As noted earlier, the IACHR considered this measure at its 72nd session and agreed to accept the difficult responsibility implicit therein.

To carry out this task, the Commission sent a group of lawyers–including the Executive Secretary and the Assistant Executive Secretary–to Nicaragua in April of 1988.  Their assignment in Managua was to study some 1,800 individual case files on former members of the Nicaraguan National Guard that were being held in the Tipitapa Penitentiary in Managua.  A lawyer from the OAS Secretariat of Juridical Affairs assisted the group from the IACHR Executive Secretariat.

As mentioned earlier, the Commission held a special session (May 9-11, 1988) to prepare its opinion on the Sapoa Agreement, which was transmitted to the OAS Secretary General on May 11 by the Commission’s President, Mr. Marco Tulio Bruni Celli.

d.                 In Situ Observation in Haiti

On June 29, 1988, the OAS Permanent Council adopted resolution no. 502 on “The Situation in Haiti and (the) Validity of the Principles of the OAS Charter.”  This resolution called upon the Committee to investigate the human rights situation in Haiti and to submit its Report to the next OAS General Assembly.

Pursuant to the mandate of the Permanent Council resolution the Commission on June 30, 1988 requested the consent of the military government of Lt. Gen. Henri Namphy to send a delegation to Haiti.  On July 12, 1988 the military government granted its consent.  The Commission sent a delegation to Haiti during the period August 20-September 2, 1988, headed by Mr. Patrick Robinson.

During its visit the Commission met with the Ministers of Interior and National Defense, Foreign Relations and Justice.  It visited six detention centers, four in Port-au-Prince:  Fort Dimanche, Casernes, Dessalines, the National Penitentiary and Recherches Criminelles and one in St. Marc and one in Hinche, in the provinces.

It inspected the cells and examined prison conditions and interviewed, in private, some prisoners whom it requested to see by name and others, at random.  The Commission also met with representatives of many human rights groups, with political leaders, with representatives of the oral and written press, with business and labor leaders and other individuals from whom it received valuable information about the current human rights situation in Haiti.

It also traveled to the interior of Haiti, to the Artibonite and to the Central Plateau, to investigate allegations regarding human rights violations it had received from these areas.

4.                  Hearings before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Between September 30 and October 7, 1987, a number of public hearings were held by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to receive the evidence submitted by the Commission and to hear the final summations of the IACHR and the Honduran Government with respect to cases nos. 7920, 7951, and 8097, involving the forced disappearances of Manfredo Velasquez, Saul Godinez, Francisco Fairen, and Yolanda Solis.

The delegates appointed by the Commission to appear at the hearings were its President, Mrs. Gilda M.C.M. de Russomano and the Executive Secretary Edmundo Vargas Carreño, assisted by counselors Claudio Grossman, Juan Mendez, Hugo Alfonso Muñoz, and Jose Miguel Vivanco.  The following witnesses presented by the Commission were questioned:  Efrain Diaz Arrivillaga, Miguel Angel Pavon, Ramon Custodio, Virgilio Carias, Milton Jimenez, Rene Velasquez Diaz, Cesar Augusto Murillo, Leopoldo Aguilar Villalobos, Florencio Caballero, Ines Consuelo Murillo, Jose Gonzalo Florez, Antonio Carillo Montes, Elizabeth Odio, Enmidida Escoto de Godinez, and Alejandrina Cruz.

The witnesses were interrogated about the following points of evidence.  The first sought to prove that between 1981 and 1984 (the period in which Francisco Fairen Garbi, Yolanda Solis Corrales, Saul Godinez Cruz, and Manfredo Velasquez Rodriguez disappeared) numerous kidnappings and disappearances in Honduras had been perpetrated by the Honduran Armed Forces, or at least with the consent of the Government.  The second point was designed to show that there had been no effective domestic remedy to protect the kidnap victims, who then disappeared as a result of action ascribed to the Honduran Armed Forces.

The Commission’s delegates presented their oral arguments during the second stage of the hearings, on October 6 and 7.  At that time President Gilda Russomano presented a general introduction and evidence that the domestic remedies had been exhausted or that such requirement was not applicable under international law.  The other delegate, Mr. Edmundo Vargas Carreño presented an analysis of the IACHR evidence and documents, as well as some comments on the forced disappearances and the criteria that should guide the Court in regard to that practice.

Later on, the Court ordered further hearings, this time of a private nature.  They took place on January 18, 19, and 20, 1988, and their purpose was to hear the testimony of Elsa Rosa Escoto Escoto, Francisco Fairen Almengor, Col. Roberto Nuñez Montes, Lt. Col. Alexander Hernandez, and Lt. Marco Tulio Regalado Hernandez (the last three being officers of the Honduran Armed Forces).  These witnesses had been unable to appear at the previous hearings or, because of new developments, had been ordered to attend by the Court or at the request of the Government of Honduras, which had not presented any witnesses at the earlier hearings.

The witnesses were interrogated by IACHR delegate Edmundo Vargas Carreño and counselors Grossman, Mendez, and Vivanco.

Some extraordinarily serious events transpired after the Court had ordered the closed hearings.  On January 5, witness Jose Isaias Viloria–who was to appear before the Court a few days later–was murdered.  On January 14, 1988, the same fate befell Miguel Angel Pavon, Vice Chairman of the Honduran Human Rights Committee and Alternate Deputy to Congress, who had testified at the October 1987 hearings.

Given these alarming incidents and after having requested the pertinent facts in the case from the Government of Honduras, the Commission asked the court, pursuant to Art. 63, paragraph two of the American Convention on Human Rights, to take all pertinent and provisional measures in its power to protect the persons who had appeared as witnesses before the Court–or would do so in the future–from bodily harm and ensure their safety and that of everyone in any way connected with the trial.

On January 15, 1988, using the powers conferred to it by Article 63 of its Regulations, the Court resolved:

1. To urge the Government of Honduras to adopt, without delay, such measures as might be necessary to prevent new attacks on the fundamental rights of persons who had appeared or were summoned to appear before this Court in connection with the Velasquez Rodriguez, Fairen Garbi and Solis Corrales, and Godinez Cruz cases, complying punctiliously with the obligation to respect and guarantee human rights which that government contracted pursuant to Article 1.1 of the Convention.

2. Similarly, to urge the Government of Honduras to take every measure within its power to investigate these reprehensible crimes, identify the perpetrators, and subject them to the penalties prescribed by Honduran domestic law.

Since the measures adopted by the Court had been very general, on January 18, 1988 the Commission’s delegate, Mr. Edmundo Vargas Carreño, asked the Court to take specific and concrete steps in this regard and to request the Government of Honduras to inform the Court, within a period of 15 days, of the concrete measures it had adopted to ensure the physical safety of the persons who had testified before the Court or were in any way involved with those cases; and to report on the judicial investigation instituted and the results of the autopsies and ballistics tests conducted regarding the murders of Jose Isaias Viloria and Miguel Angel Pavon.

On January 19, 1988, invoking the powers conferred on it by Article 63.2, 22 and 62.3 of the American Convention on Human Rights, the Court acceded in every detail to the requests made by the IACHR delegate.

On February 3, 1988, the Government of Honduras complied in part with the Court’s requests and requested an extension of the deadline, which was denied by the President of the Court.

In a public hearing held in San José, Costa Rica on July 29, 1988, the Court read out the sentence handed down in case No. 7920 involving the forced disappearance of Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez, leaving pending the other two decisions on the cases presented by the Commission.

The Court, after considering the arguments of the parties, delivered the following judgment:

1. Reject the preliminary objection interposed by the Government of Honduras alleging the inadmissibility of the case for the failure to exhaust domestic legal remedies.

2. Declare that Honduras has violated, in the case of Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez, its obligations to respect and to ensure the right to personal liberty set forth in Article 7 of the convention, read in conjunction with Article 1 (1) thereof.

3. Declare that Honduras has violated, in the case of Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez, its obligations to respect and to ensure the right to humane treatment set forth in Article 5 of the Convention, read in conjunction of Article 1 (1) thereof.

4. Declare that Honduras has violated, in the case of Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez, its obligations to ensure the right to life set forth in Article 4 of the Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1 (1) thereof.

5. Decide that Honduras is hereby required to pay fair compensation to the families of the victim.

6. Decide that the form and amount of such compensation, failing agreement between Honduras and the Commission within six months of the date of this judgment, shall be settled by the Court, and reserves for this purpose the subsequent procedure in the case.

7. Decide that the agreement on the form and amount of the compensation shall be approved by the Court.

8. Did not find it necessary to render a decision concerning costs.

The judgment was unanimous except for the dissent of Judge Piza on the sixth point.

5.                  Other Business

Other activities conducted by the Commission during the period covered by the present report consisted of:

a.       Exchange of lawyers between the EHRC Secretariat and the IACHR Secretariat

In September 1987, the IACHR Secretariat welcomed Spanish attorney Antonio Estables from the Counsel of Europe, who spent a month working at the IACHR pursuant to an agreement with the European Human Rights Commission, calling for exchange of professional lawyers to allow each Commission to become acquainted with the work performed by the other, excluding matters of a strictly confidential nature.

In October 1987, Principal Specialist and IACHR Secretariat attorney Manual Velasco Clark spent a month in Strasbourg to perform the same functions in the Secretariat of the European Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

b.                 Publication of the Inter-American Yearbook on Human Rights

The first volume of the Inter-American Yearbook of Human Rights covering the year 1985 was published in an impressive bilingual (Spanish-English) edition in the Netherlands by Martinus Nijhoff in November 1987.  The Nijhoff publishing house is also the distributor of the 1261-page volume.

The Yearbook describes all of the OAS activities in the protection of human rights, including the work of the Inter-American Commission and Court, and that of the OAS General Assembly.

c.                 44th Session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights

Early in March 1988, Commission President Gilda Russomano spent several days as an observer at the 44th session of the United Nations Human rights Commission, held in Geneva, Switzerland from February 1 through March 12, 1988.  Her presence helped to strengthen cooperation relations between the world and the regional organizations and to apprise the IACHR of the way the UN agency handles cases which also come within the purview of the IACHR, whether involving the situation of various countries in this hemisphere or matters of a general nature.  The speech which Mrs. Russomano gave at that time is transcribed in document OEA/Ser.L/V/II/72, doc.14 of March 9, 1988, and explains the IACHR objectives and the major topics considered by the Commission in recent years.

During her stay in Geneva, President Russomano was also in contact with officials of the United Nations Human Rights Center, as well as representatives and officials of other agencies–both governmental and private–in the field of human rights.

d.                 Handbook of Existing Rules Pertaining to Human Rights

Early in March 1988, the Commission’s Secretariat published an updated (to March 1988) version of the former “Handbook of Existing Rules Pertaining to Human Rights.”  The new title of the bilingual work (Spanish and English) is “Basic Documents Pertaining to Human Rights in the Inter-American System.”

[  Table of Contents |Previous | Next  ]