of the standards applied in the determination of Sebastian Furlan’s rights with the rights of the
child (Article 19); the relation of the claims raised to the right to personal integrity (Article 5),
taking into account Sebastian’s status as a minor at the time of the facts; and the relation of the
claims to the State’s general obligation to respect and ensure protected rights (Article 1.1).
II.

PROCESSING BEFORE THE COMMISSION

6. The first communication was presented at the OAS office in Buenos Aires on July 18, 2001, and
forwarded to the Commission’s offices. This was followed by communications received on August
7, 2001, July 24, 2002, August 16, 2002, and October 28, 2002. The Commission initiated the
processing of the petition on December 16, 2002, when it transmitted the pertinent parts to the
State with a request for relevant information within two months.
7. The State presented information in response by note of February 24, 2003, with a brief
additional note of February 27, 2003. The State’s responses were transmitted to the petitioner in
a note of March 17, 2003, with the presentation of observations requested within one month.
8. The petitioner presented additional information and observations by means of communications
dated March 10, 20 and 26, 2003. These were transmitted to the State on May 28, 2003, with a
request for observations within one month. Additionally, the Commission transmitted a
communication from the petitioner of April 3, 2003, via note of May 28, 2003. The State
responded with a communication dated June 30, 2003, which was transmitted to the petitioner on
August 20, 2003.
9. The petitioner filed an additional communication on November 17, 2003, which was
subsequently transmitted to the State. He filed further communications on July 28, September 13,
and November 8, 2004. These were transmitted to the State on November 22, 2004. The
petitioner presented a further communication on November 24, 2004, which was subsequently
transmitted to the State.
10. In December of 2004, the Commission carried out a working visit in Argentina, and during
that time met with the parties in a number of petitions, including with Danilo Furlan and
representatives of the State. The meeting included a discussion as to the whether it would be
possible for the State to facilitate access to psychological care for Sebastian Furlan and his family,
as well as to two other forms of assistance. The Commission thereafter addressed a
communication to the State manifesting its interest in the definition of certain preliminary points
discussed. The State responded with a note of January 7, 2005, reporting on some preliminary
steps in the framework of possible humanitarian assistance. While a constructive dialogue was
initiated, it did not produce a change in the situation.
11. For his part, the petitioner presented additional information by a note of January 21, 2005,
and this was transmitted to the State by note of February 3, 2005. The petitioner provided
additional submissions on March 17, April 4, April 25, May 23, May 24, June 1, June 10, August 4,
August 11, September 7, September 9, October 21, December 19, and December 29, 2005, as
well as January 9, 2006. The pertinent parts of these communications were transmitted to the
State. The State, for its part, filed an additional communication dated November 11, 2005, which
was transmitted to the petitioner.
III.

POSITION OF THE PARTIES

A.

Position of the Petitioner

12. The petitioner recounts that Sebastian Furlan was 14 years old when, on December 21, 1988,
he went with his little brother and some other boys to play in an abandoned military installation

2

Select target paragraph3