Order of the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights 
of April 3, 2009
Case of Castillo Páez v. Perú
(Monitoring Compliance with Judgment)

HAVING SEEN:
1.
The Judgment on merits issued by the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights (hereinafter “the Court”, “the Inter-American Court”, or “the Tribunal”) on
November 3, 1997 in the Case of Castillo Páez v. Perú, through which it
DECIDES:
unanimously
1.
That the State of Perú violated the right to personal liberty recognized in Article
7 of the American Convention Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the
detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.
[…]
2.
That the State of Perú violated the right to humane treatment recognized in
Article 5 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1)
thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.
[…]
3.
That the State of Perú violated the right to life recognized in Article 4 of the
American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the
detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.
[…]
4.
That the State of Perú violated the right to effective recourse to a competent
national court or tribunal, recognized in Article 25 of the American Convention on Human
Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez
and his next-of-kin.
[…]
5.
That the State of Perú is obliged to repair the consequences of those violations
and compensate the victim's next-of-kin and reimburse them for any expenses they may
have incurred in their representations to the Perúvian authorities in connection with this
case, for which purpose the proceeding remains open.

2.
The Judgment on reparations issued by the Inter-American Court on
November 27, 1998 in the present case, through which it
DECIDED:
unanimously,
1. To set the reparations that the State shall pay to the next of kin of Ernesto Rafael
Castillo-Páez at US$245,021.80 (two hundred forty-five thousand twenty-one United
States dollars and eighty cents) or its equivalent in local currency. The State is to make



Judge Diego García-Sayán, of Perúvian nationality, excused himself from hearing the present
case, pursuant with Articles 19(2) of the Statute and 20 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court (partially
reformed in its LXXXII Regular Session, held on January 19-31, 2009), reason for which he did not
participate in the deliberation of the present Order.

Select target paragraph3