ORDER OF THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
FOR THIS CASE ∗
OF AUGUST 7, 2013
REQUEST PRESENTED BY THE COMMON INTERVENER OF THE
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE VICTIMS AND THEIR NEXT OF KIN
CASE OF THE MIGUEL CASTRO CASTRO PRISON v. PERU
MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH JUDGMENT

HAVING SEEN:
1.
The Judgment on merits, reparations and costs (hereinafter “the Judgment”)
delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Court” or “the Court”) on November 25, 2006.
2.
The interpretation judgment handed down by the Inter-American Court on
August 2, 2008.
3.
The notes of the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) of
June 4, and July 9 and 23, 2013, in which it advised the parties and the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights that the Court had decided to reschedule the
private hearing on monitoring compliance with the Judgment in this case in order to
hold it at the seat of the Court on August 19, during its one hundredth regular
session.
4.
The Order issued by the acting President of the Court for this case on July 28,
2013, in which he ruled on the request filed by Mónica Feria Tinta, victim and
common intervener of the representatives of the victims and their next of kin, for
access to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights (hereinafter “the Victims’ Assistance Fund” or “the Assistance Fund”).
5.
The brief of August 5, 2013, and its attachment, in which Douglass Cassel,
common intervener of the representatives of the victims and their next of kin in this
case, presented a request for support from the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund of the
Inter-American Court in relation to the appearance of a victim at the said private
hearing on monitoring compliance.
6.
The notes of the Secretariat of August 6, 2013, in which it advised the
common intervener Douglass Cassel, the other common intervener of the
representatives of the victims, Mónica Feria Tinta, the State of Peru and the Inter∗

Judge Diego García-Sayán did not take part in the deliberation and signature of the Judgment in
this case. Pursuant to Articles 4(2) and 5 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, Judge Manuel E. Ventura
Robles, Vice President of the Court, was the acting President for this case.

Select target paragraph3