REPORT No. 102/13
CASE 12.723
MERITS
TGGL
ECUADOR
November 5, 2013
I.

SUMMARY

1.
On June 26, 2006, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Commission”, “the Commission” or “IACHR”) received a complaint submitted by Iván Patricio
Durazno Campoverde1 (hereinafter “the petitioners”) in favor of TGGL2 (hereinafter “the alleged victim” or
“the girl TGGL”), arguing the international responsibility of the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State of
Ecuador”, “the Ecuadorian State” or “Ecuador”) for an alleged contraction of the HIV virus by the girl – then
aged 3 years - on June 22, 1998, via a blood transfusion given at the Pablo Jaramillo Humanitarian Clinic
Foundation. According to the petitioners, the blood used in the transfusion originated in the Azuay Red Cross
Blood Bank without the necessary blood serum tests being undertaken. They alleged that the girl TGGL has
been the victim of discrimination and that neither the criminal nor civil trials have provided a solution to the
situation. According to the petitioners, the State is responsible for both, the infection and its grave
consequences.
2.
For its part, in its single submission at the admissibility stage, the State alleged that domestic
remedies had not been exhausted, a point that was duly analyzed in the admissibility report. As regards the
merits, the State of Ecuador pointed out that it is not responsible for the infection since both the hospitals where
TGGL received treatment and the Red Cross, are private law institutions. Similarly, it indicated that the
allegations of supposed discrimination were vague and do not involve any state authority whatsoever. Lastly,
the State pointed out that it is not responsible for the petitioners’ “disagreements” with the decisions issued by
the local courts.
3.
After examining the position of the parties, the Inter-American Commission concluded that the
State of Ecuador was responsible for the violation of the right to a dignified life, personal integrity, and judicial
guarantees and protections, laid down in Articles 4, 5, 8 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights
(hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) in conjunction with the obligations established in
Article 1.1 of the same instrument to the prejudice of TGGL. Incidentally, the Commission also concluded that
the State of Ecuador failed to fulfill its obligations of special protection towards TGGL in her status as a child, in
violation of Article 19 of the American Convention. Additionally, the Commission concluded that the State of
Ecuador was responsible for violation of the rights to moral integrity and the rights to judicial guarantees and
judicial protection, enshrined in Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention in conjunction with the
obligations established in Article 1.1 of the same instrument in prejudice of the mother and brother of TGGL.
Consequently, the Commission issued the appropriate recommendations.
II.
4.
Campoverde.

PROCEEEDINGS BEFORE THE IACHR
On June 26, 2006, the Commission received the initial petition filed by Mr. Iván Durazno

5.
The Admissibility Report issued on August 7, 2009, includes a detailed description of the
proceedings carried out from the presentation of the petition until the decision on admissibility.3 In this
1

Subsequently, the attorneys Gustavo Quito Mendieta and Susana Larriva joined the claim as co-petitioners.

As the Commission stated in its Admissibility Report, despite the lack of an express request by the petitioners, the alleged
victim’s identity was protected. In addition, confidentiality was extended to TGGL’s mother and the blood donors.
3 IACHR, Report No. 89/09 (Admissibility), Petition 663/06, TGGL, Ecuador, August 7, 2009, paras. 4 and 5. Available at the
following website: http://www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/2009eng/Ecuador663.06eng.htm.
2

Select target paragraph3