-3did so, things would get worse for her.” The Commission was given a
certificate from a private doctor;
f) Regarding the said facts of April 23, 2006, “it should be underscored that the
State did not make any reference to this event in the brief it forwarded to the
Commission. It merely sent, as an attachment, a copy of an official record
prepared by personnel of the Third Departmental Police Station itself about
the way in which the facts allegedly occurred.” The State reported, inter alia,
that: the official record of the Ombudsman’s Office states that on Sunday,
April 23, 2006, at 20:25 hours, Luis Alberto Alcaína “was transferred to the
Regional Hospital where he receive medical care and was prescribed
medication”; according to an official communication of the Third Departmental
Police Station, on April 23, 2006, Mr. Alcaína tried to escape; also Valeria
Torres was detained for the offense of causing damage, injury and resisting
authority, when she visited the Guard’s Office of the Departmental Police
State with her mother at 15:15 hours, saying that they were members of Mr.
Alcaína’s family, and an investigation has been opened for the offenses of
damage, injury and resisting authority. According to this communication, both
Mr. Alcaína and Valeria Torres injured themselves;
g) The ineffectiveness of the protection measures applied by the State in favor of
the beneficiaries. The events of April 2006 “provide clear evidence that the
security measures adopted by the State have been inadequate.” Furthermore,
Miguel Ángel Sánchez and Juan Pablo Caba have not been transferred to
other detention centers, “so that, at this time, they do not have protection in
keeping with the gravity of the situation and the imminence of the danger to
their life”;
h) Regarding the urgent need to adopt measures, “it should be recalled that the
case that gave rise to the precautionary measures is related to the [alleged]
disappearance of Iván Torres, which has not yet been clarified. Also that three
witnesses in the case opened in relation to this disappearance have died in
violent circumstances, one of them while he was detained in the Comodoro
Rivadavia Municipal Jail. Added to this, other witnesses in this case and other
beneficiaries have been subjected to constant threats, so that there is
imminent danger for their life and personal integrity”; and
i)
The gravity of the threat relates not only to the certainty and imminence of
the damage that is feared, but particularly to the fundamental nature of the
rights threatened. The insecurity created as a result of the statements made
by the witnesses of the facts relating to the disappearance of Iván Eladio
Torres, added to the aforementioned events of April 23, 2006, lead to the
reasonable conclusion that the beneficiaries of these measures are exposed to
grave danger.
3.
In light of the above, the Commission requested the Court to require the
State:
a)
That it adopt, forthwith, all necessary measures to ensure the protection of the personal
integrity and life of María Leontina Millacura Llaipén, her children Marcos and Valeria
Torres, her son-in-law Juan Pablo Caba; Gerardo Colín; Patricio Oliva; Tamara Bolívar;
Walter Mansilla; Silvia de los Santos; Verónica Heredia; Miguel Ángel Sánchez; and also
Viviana and Sonia Hayes;