REPORT No. 70/11
PETITION 975-10
ADMISSIBILITY
ADÁN GUILLERMO LÓPEZ LONE ET AL.
HONDURAS
March 31, 2011

I.

SUMMARY

1.
On July 6, 2010, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the
Commission” or “IACHR”) received a petition presented by the Asociación de Jueces por la Democracia
(AJD) and the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) (hereinafter “the petitioners”) alleging the
responsibility of the State of Honduras (hereinafter “the State”, “Honduras” or “the Honduran State”) for
the dismissal from office of judges Adán Guillermo López Lone, Luis Alonso Chévez de la Rocha and
Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado, and magistrate Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza (hereinafter “the
alleged victims”) at the hands of the Supreme Court of Honduras, allegedly on arbitrary, illegal and
political grounds.
2.
The petitioners alleged that the State was responsible for the violation of the rights
enshrined in Articles 8 (right to a fair trial), 13 (freedom of thought and expression), 15 (right of assembly),
16 (freedom of association) and 25 (right to judicial protection) of the American Convention on Human
Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”), in relation to the duty to respect and
ensure the rights set forth at Article 1(1) and the duty to adopt legislative or other measures set forth at
Article 2 thereof. As for the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies, the petitioners
argue that it is applicable the exception set forth at Article 46.2(a) of the American Conve ntion.
3.
For its part, the State alleged that the petitioners had failed to comply with the
requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies. Moreover, the State alleges that the petition should
be rejected on the grounds that it does not present facts that tend to establish violations of the rights
enshrined in the American Convention.
4.
After analyzing the positions of the parties and compliance with the requirements set out
in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention, the Commission decides to declare the claim
admissible for the purposes of examining the alleged violations of Articles 13, 15 and 16 in conjunction
with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof. The Commission decides to join the analysis of the requirement of
exhaustion of domestic remedies to its considerations of the merits of the complaint regarding the
possible violation of Articles 8 and 25. Additionally, through application of the principle of iura novit curiae,
the Commission will analyze during the merits phase the possible violation of Article 5.1 of the
Convention. The Commission decides to notify the parties of the report, to order its publication, and to
include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly.
II.

PROCESSING BEFORE THE COMMISSION

5.
On July 6, 2010, the IACHR registered the petition as number P-975-10. On August 20,
2010, the IACHR transmitted a copy of its pertinent parts to the State, giving it two months to submit
information. On October 19, 2010, the State of Honduras submitted its observations to the Commission.
The IACHR received observations from the petitioners on September 22, 2010 and January 20, 2011,
which were duly passed on to the State. Also, the IACHR received observations from the State on March
11 and 22, 2011. The referred communications were duly passed on to the petitioners.
6.
On March 25, 2011, during the 141° Ordinary Period of Sessions of the IACHR, a public
hearing took place where the parties presented their allegations respect the admissibility of the complaint.
III.

POSITION OF THE PARTIES

A.

The petitioners

Select target paragraph3