REPORT No. 148/11
PETITION 12.268
ADMISSIBILITY
GONZALO ORLANDO CORTEZ ESPINOZA
ECUADOR
November 1st, 2011

I.

SUMMARY

1.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission”)
received a petition on March 29, 2000, presented by the Human Rights Clinic of the School of Law
of the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador (hereinafter “the petitioners”), alleging the
responsibility of the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”) for the illegal
detention and other violations of the right to personal liberty, violation of the right to humane
treatment, and violation of the right to private property, as well as the failure to uphold the right to
a fair trial in the criminal proceeding brought against Gonzalo Orlando Cortés Espinoza (hereinafter
“the alleged victim”), dating from July 11, 1997, in the city of Quito.
2.
The petitioners argue that the State is responsible for violating Articles 5, 7, 8, and
21 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the
Convention”) in conjunction with its Articles 1(1) and 2. The State argues that the petition is
inadmissible given the failure to exhaust available domestic remedies and that there were no
violations of the American Convention.
3.
After analyzing the positions of the parties and the requirements provided for at
Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention, the Commission decided to declare the petition
admissible for the purposes of examining the alleged violation of Articles 5, 7, 8, and 21 of the
American Convention, in conjunction with its Articles 1(1); and in application of the principle of iura
novit curia it also decided to declare admissible the possible violation of Article 25 of the American
Convention, in conjunction with Article 1(1). In addition, it decided to find the petition inadmissible
with respect to the alleged violation of Article 2 of the American Convention and to give notice of
the report to the parties and order its publication in its Annual Report.
II.

PROCESSING BEFORE THE IACHR

5.
On March 29, 1997, the IACHR received the petition that was recorded under number
12,268 and after a preliminary analysis, on April 20, 2000; a copy of the pertinent parts was
transmitted to the State for its observations. On July 11, 2000, the State presented its response,
which on August 14, 2000, was transmitted to the petitioners for their observations.
6.
On August 6, 2010, the IACHR asked the petitioners to provide updated information
to determine whether the motives of the claim persisted. On September 8, 2010, the petitioners
requested an extension, and a copy of the record in the petition, which was granted by the
Commission, which also agreed to forward the copies requested. On October 22, 2010, the
petitioners presented their response, which was forwarded to the State for its observations. On
March 17, 2010, the State presented its response, which was forwarded to the petitioners.

Select target paragraph3