REPORT No. Nº 97/ 091
September 8, 2009


1. On January 24, 2007, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the
Commission”) received a petition submitted by Pedro Nikken, Hélio Bicudo, Claudio Grossman,
Juan Méndez, Douglas Cassel, and Héctor Faúndez (hereinafter "the petitioners ") alleging that
the courts of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (hereinafter "the State") are responsible for
the political persecution of constitutional law expert Allan R. Brewer Carías in the context of a
judicial proceeding against him for the crime of conspiracy to violently change the Constitution
in the context of the events of April 11 to 13, 2002.
2.The petitioners alleged that the State is responsible for violating the rights to personal security,
judicial guarantees, honor and dignity, freedom of expression, movement and residence, equal
protection, and judicial protection, provided for at Articles 7, 8, 11, 13, 22, 24, and 25 of the
American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention " or "the
Convention"), as well as breaching its duty to respect the rights enshrined in the Convention and
to adopt provisions of domestic law in keeping with Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention. They
also alleged that their claim is admissible by application of the exceptions to the rule of prior
exhaustion of domestic remedies provided for at Article 46(2) of the American Convention. The
State, for its part, alleged that Allan Brewer Carías is subjected to a criminal proceeding with all
the guarantees of due process, that he is absent from the country and, therefore, the
proceedings could not move forward, and that the petition is inadmissible because the domestic
remedies had not been exhausted.
3.After examining the allegations received, and pursuant to the requirements set forth at Articles
46 and 47 of the American Convention, the Commission decided to declare the claim admissible
with respect to the alleged violation of Articles 2, 8, 13 and 25 of the American Convention, in
connection with its article 1(1). In addition, it declared the claim inadmissible with respect to the
alleged violation of Articles 7, 11, 22, and 24 of the American Convention and decided to give
notice of the report to the parties and order its publication in its Annual Report to the General


4. The petition was recorded under number P 87/07. After the preliminary analysis of the claims,
on October 24, 2007, additional information was requested from the petitioners on the judicial
remedies pursued and the procedural effects of the physical absence of the accused in
Venezuela, among other issues. On November 19, 2007, the petitioners requested an extension,
which was granted on November 27, 2007. By communication of December 27, 2007, the
petitioners filed their response. By communications of February 25 and April 30, 2008, the
petitioners submitted additional information.
5.Once the preliminary review of the petition was completed, the Commission decided to process
it, and on June 17, 2008, a copy of the pertinent parts was sent to the State, which was given
two months to submit observations in keeping with Article 30(2) of the Rules of Procedure. The
period expired without the State submitting its observations.

In accordance with the provisions of Article 17(2)(a) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, Commissioner Luz
Patricia Mejía Guerrero, a Venezuelan national, did not take part in the debate or in the decision of the present case.
Likewise, Commissioner Víctor Abramovich recused himself from the debate and the decision in this case in accordance
with the provisions of Article 17(2)(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission


Select target paragraph3