|
OEA/Ser.L/V/II.79.rev.1 ANNUAL
REPORT OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION REPORT
N°
16/90 CASE
9816 PERU BACKGROUND: 1. On October 24, 1986, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights received the following complaints:
We are concerned about the safety of these persons, who have disappeared
following their alleged detention by security forces in the Provinces of Huanta,
La Mar, and Vilcashuaman in the Department of Ayacucho.
On September 23, 1986, Jorge Herminio Mina, Rudencio Sanchez Valdes and
Amancio Degadillo were detained by combined forces of the army and the police in
the town of Cangari, Province of Huanta; it is assumed that they are being
detained in the Castro Pampa barracks.
On October 9, 1986, Cirilo Quiquin Casaico was detained by army troops in
Quinrapa in the Province of Huanta, and is now in the Castro Pampa barracks.
On October 10, 1986, Teodosio Anaya Valenzuela and Antonio Carnera
Sanchez were detained by army forces in San Francisco, Province of La Mar.
It is assumed that they are at the Manchente military base.
We are also concerned by the "disappearance" of Antonio Teodoro
Llampasi Cerda, detained by the army on October 9, 1986, in Ccantollo, Concepción
District, Vilcashuaman, it is assumed that they are now in "Los Cabitos"
barracks.
None of them has reappeared.
2.
In a note of October 29, 1986, 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 notes sent to the
Government on January 13, 1987, February 18, 1988, June 7, 1988, February 17,
1989, and September 7, 1989, which referred to the possibility of applying
Article 42 of the Regulations of the Commission.
No reply was received to those notes 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 facts denounced in the communication of October
24, 1986, on the arbitrary detention by Peruvian government agents and the
subsequent disappearance of: Jorge
Herminio Mina, Rudencio Sanchez Valdes and Amancio Degadillo, on September 23,
1986, in the town of Cangari, Province of Huanta; Cirilo Quiquin Casaico, on
October 9, 1986, in Quinrapa, Province of Huanta; Teodosio Anaya Valenzuela and
Antonio Carnera Sanchez, on October 10, 1986, in San Francisco, Province of La
Mar; Antonio Teodoro Llampasi Cerda, on October 9, 1986, in Ccantollo,
Concepcion District, Vilcashuaman.
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 victims.
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 ] |