REPORT No. 301/20
CASE 12.963
October 29, 2020


1. On December 27, 2004, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American
Commission,” “the Commission,” or “the IACHR”) received a petition lodged by Alejandro Nissen Pessolani
(hereinafter “the petitioner” or “the alleged victim”), alleging that the Republic of Paraguay (hereinafter “the
Paraguayan State,” “the State,” or “Paraguay”) bears international responsibility as a result of two cases brought
against him before the Jury for the Prosecution of Magistrates (Jurado de Enjuiciamiento de Magistrados,
hereinafter “JEM”), which decided to remove him from his post as a Criminal Prosecutor.
2. The Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 60/14 on July 24, 2014. 1 On August 18, 2014, the
Commission notified the parties of the report and made itself available to them to reach a friendly settlement,
but the conditions were not in place to initiate such as proceeding. The parties had the requisite time frames in
which to submit additional comments on the merits. All the information the Commission received was duly
transmitted to the parties.
A. Petitioner
3. The petitioner indicates that in 2001, when he was Prosecutor for Criminal Unit No. 10, he began to
investigate a series of acts of corruption in both the public and private sectors. He indicates that the individuals
under investigation included some well-known politicians in the government at the time and others in their
family circle. He alleges that “in order to remove him from the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which was
investigating them,” two proceedings were instituted against him before the JEM, the body responsible for
prosecuting and removing individuals who work as prosecutors in the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
4. The petitioner indicates that the individuals under investigation had asked the Prosecutor General of the
State (Fiscal General del Estado, hereinafter “FGE”) to strip him of his prosecutor’s post, and states that the FGE
had warned him about these pressures. He notes that it was in this context that two proceedings were instituted
against him, under procedures governed by Laws 1.084 and 1.752.
First proceeding
5. The petitioner states that on March 12, 2002, Cristian Paolo Ortiz filed a complaint against him for poor
performance of his duties, a complaint that did not meet the requirements under the law. The petitioner
specifies that the complainant had not posted the necessary bond, because he had provided as proof of his
economic solvency a property that had been seized by order of the court in the investigation against him. The
petitioner states that he complained to the JEM that Mr. Ortiz’s complaint “was simply intended to remove him
from that case and from [his] prosecutor’s post so that emphasis would no longer be placed on investigations
of that type,” but the JEM decided to initiate its processing of the complaint, on May 22, 2002.

IACHR. Report No. 60/14, Petition 1415-04, Admissibility, Alejandro Nissen Pessolani, Paraguay, July 24, 2014. The Commission declared
the petition to be admissible with regard to Articles 2, 8, 9, and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof.
The Commission also found the petition inadmissible with respect to Article 10 of the American Convention.


Select target paragraph3