|
OEA/Ser.L/V/II.79.rev.1 ANNUAL
REPORT OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION REPORT
N°
32/90 CASE
10.222 PERU BACKGROUND:
1.
On August 22, 1988, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
received the following complaint: The
human rights violation that took place in the District of Chazuta, Province of
San Martin, Peru. On
July 13, 1988, a Peruvian Army patrol consisting of 70 soldiers and two captains
raided the settlement of Llucanayacu, District of Chazuta, Province of San
Martin, arrested its inhabitants, and occupied the school and church.
They also threatened local officials and burned the homes of peasants
Fabriciano Chujandama Chasnamote and Margarita Gonzalez Panduro. In
the raid on the settlement of Llucanayacu, the following individuals were
arrested and taken away by helicopter, presumably to the Mariscal Caceres de
Morales barracks: Fabriciano
Chujandama Chasnamote and Mamerto Chujanda Chasnamote on July 13, 1988, and
Roldan Sabota Chujandama, on July 15, 1988. They
also arrested and tortured Edgardo Chujandama Pinedo and William Pozo, who were
later set free because of poor health. They
threatened to kill Lieutenant Governor Brígido Chujandama Chuasnamote and the
townspeople in general and said they would still kill someone so as to
intimidate the people.
2.
In a note of August 22, 1988, the Commission transmitted the pertinent
parts of the complaint to the Government of the Republic of Peru, with a request
for any relevant information, but failed to receive a reply within the statutory
period. 3. The request for information was reiterated through note sent to the Government on September 7, 1989, which referred to the possibility of applying Article 42 of the Regulations of the Commission. No reply was received to that note either. CONSIDERING:
1.
That in resolution AG/RES. 666 (XIII-O/83) the General Assembly
declared that "the practice of forced disappearance of persons in the
Americas is an affront to the conscience of the hemisphere and constitutes a
crime against humanity."
2.
That the period established in Article 34, paragraph 5, of the
Regulations of the Commission has elapsed without the Government of Peru having
responded to the request for information made by the IACHR in the notes referred
to in the background section of this report, so that it may be presumed that
there are not any remedies under domestic jurisdiction to be exhausted (Article
46 of the American Convention), in light of the adversarial procedure
established in that Convention.
3.
That Article 42 of the Regulations of the Commission reads: Article 42 The
facts reported in the petition whose pertinent parts have been transmitted to
the government of the State in reference if, during the maximum period set by
the Commission under the provisions of Article 34, paragraph 5, the government
has not provided the pertinent information, as long as other evidence does not
lead to a different conclusion.
4.
That Article 1, paragraph 1, of the American Convention on Human Rights
reads: Article 1. Obligation to Respect Rights 1.
The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and
freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their
jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without
any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth,
or any other social condition.
5.
That the Republic of Peru is a State Party to the American Convention on
Human Rights and has ratified the binding jurisdiction of the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Therefore, in view of the related background and the considerations as well as of the fact that the Commission does not have any other evidence that would lead it to a different conclusion, based on Article 42 of its Regulations,
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, RESOLVES: 1. To presume to be true the claims presented in the August 22, 1988, correspondence pertaining to the arbitrary arrest by agents of the Peruvian state and subsequent disappearance of Fabriciano Chujandama Chasnamote and Mamerto Chujandama Chasnamote, on July 13, 1988, and of Roldan Sabota Chujandama, on July 15, 1988, and pertaining to the death threats toward an arbitrary arrest of the residents of the settlement of Llucanayacu, District of Chazuta, Province of San Martin, as well as the threats toward officials and the burning of homes.
2.
To declare that that act constitutes a serious violation by the Peruvian
state of the rights to life, humane treatment, personal liberty and a fair trial
(Articles 4, 5, 7, and 8, respectively, of the American Convention on Human
Rights).
3.
To recommend to the Government of Peru that it conduct the most
exhaustive investigation possible of the acts denounced in order to identify
those who are directly or indirectly responsible so that they may receive the
corresponding legal penalties and that it inform the Commission of
its decision and the measures taken, within a maximum period of 60 days.
4.
To recommend to the Government of Peru that it adopt the measures established
under national law to indemnify the families of the victim.
5.
To transmit this report to the Government of the Republic of Peru and to
the petitioners.
6.
If, within the period set in operative paragraph 3 of this report, the
Government of Peru has not presented observations, the Commission shall include
this report in its Annual Report to the General Assembly, in accordance with
Article 48 of the Regulations of the Commission. [ Table of Contents | Previous | Next ] |
