REPORT Nº 84/08 PETITION 40-03 ADMISSIBILITY BLAS VALENCIA CAMPOS ET AL. BOLIVIA October 30, 2008 I. SUMMARY 1. On January 8, 2003, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter also “the Inter-American Commission,” “the Commission,” or “the IACHR”) received a petition from Mr. Arturo Rodríguez Tapia (hereinafter also “the petitioner”) on behalf of 26 persons1 (hereinafter also “the alleged victims”), in which the Republic of Bolivia (hereinafter also “Bolivia,” “the State,” or “the Bolivian State”) is alleged to have violated the rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights2 (hereinafter also “the American Convention,” “the Convention,” or the “ACHR”), the rights protected in Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, and the rights enshrined in Articles 2, 3, 4, and 7 a) and b) of the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (hereinafter also “the Convention of Belém do Pará”). The petitioner indicated that in the early morning hours of December 18, 2001, a police operation was carried out involving violent raids on the residences of the alleged victims, who were savagely beaten after having been subjugated and handcuffed. He stated that the alleged victims included some children, and that women were also beaten and forced to strip naked on several occasions, and that several of them were victims of sexual violence on the part of policemen. The petitioner added that the acts of torture continued at Judicial Technical Police stations, where those arrested were held in solitary confinement for three months and were forced to incriminate themselves without due guarantees. In terms of domestic remedies, the petitioner stated that the alleged victims were unable to exhaust judicial remedies due to threats by police officers and due to being held in solitary confinement for three months. 2. For its part, the State of Bolivia argued that the alleged victims are part of an organized criminal group and that the use of force in their capture was reasonable and necessary, and had to do with the high degree of danger posed by those who were arrested. The State also stressed that the defendants’ judicial guarantees were respected throughout the criminal proceedings and that currently the individuals are serving their sentences. In terms of admissibility requirements, the State contended that domestic remedies were not exhausted, because when the petition was filed the criminal proceedings still had not yet culminated; moreover, 1 Blas Valencia Campos; Norma Lupe Alarcón de Valencia; Mercedes Valencia Chuquimia; Mauricio Valenzuela Valencia (age 15); Álvaro Taboada Valencia; Claudia Valencia Alarcón; Carlos Eladio Cruz Añez; Patricia Catalina Gallardo Ardúz; María Fernanda Peña Gallardo (deceased); Freddy Cáceres Castro; Oswaldo Lulleman Antezana; Raúl Oswaldo Lulleman Gutiérrez; Victoria Gutiérrez de Lulleman; Paola Lulleman de Zaconeta; Luís F. Lulleman Gutiérrez; Julia Mamani Mamani; Genaro Ahuacho Luna (Walter Herrera Flores - deceased); Carlos Enrique Castro Ramírez; Alfredo Bazán La Rosas (José Miguel Abildo Díaz); Víctor Manuel Boggiano Bruzon (Juan Ramírez Ortega); Elacio Peña Córdoba; Francis Elida Pimentela Merino; Edwin Rodríguez Alarcón; Gabriel Valencia Alarcón; Alexis Valencia Alarcón (age 12); Claudio Valencia (age 3). The petitioner does not explain the reason for the double identity of five of the alleged victims. The annexes provided by the State also show double identities for some of the alleged victims. It was not possible to determine which of the identities was real. The Commission will analize the admissibility of the petition with regard to 26 persons, including the three that both the petitioners and the State have identified with two names. 2 The petitioner does not specify the articles of the American Convention he considers to have been violated. 1

Select target paragraph3