2
2.
The Judgment on interpretation of the Judgment on the merits, issued by the
Court on January 29, 2000, in the operative paragraphs of which it unanimously
decided:
1.
That only the first, second, third and fourth points of the request for
interpretation of the judgment of September 29, 1999, in the Cesti Hurtado case, filed
by the State of Peru, [we]re admissible.
2.
That the first and eighth rulings of the judgment of September 29, 1999, in
which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered the State to comply with the
decision of the Chamber of Public Law of Lima of February 12, 1997, and to annul the
proceeding, as well as all the effects deriving from it, were of an obligatory nature and,
therefore, should be complied with immediately, although this did not impede the
competent authorities from making decisions on Mr. Cesti Hurtado’s criminal
responsibility with regard to the illegal acts that are attributed to him.
3.
That the eighth ruling of the judgment of September 29, 1999, by which the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered the annulment of the proceeding against
Mr. Cesti Hurtado, implied the invalidation of all the legal effects of this, including,
among others, annulment of the embargoes decreed on his property.
4.
That it is not in order for the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to make a
pronouncement on the applicability of its judgments in hypothetical future situations and
that, in this case, the appropriateness of the remedy of habeas corpus as a procedural
channel to define whether the detention of Mr. Cesti Hurtado was of an arbitrary nature
was clearly and duly established by the Court in its judgment of September 29, 1999.

3.
The Judgment on reparations issued by the Court on May 31, 2001, in the
operative paragraphs of which it decided:
[…]
1. to order the State of Peru to compensate Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado for the
pecuniary damage he was caused by the violations declared in the judgment on merits of
September 29, 1999, and that, following the pertinent national procedures, it [wa]s in
order to establish the corresponding compensatory amounts, so that he m[ight] receive
them within a reasonable period of time, if there [were] cause for them[;]
[…]
2. to order the State of Peru pay Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado a compensation of US$
25,000.00 (twenty-five thousand United States dollars) or the equivalent in Peruvian
currency, for non-pecuniary damage[;]
[...]
3. to order the State of Peru to pay Carmen Cardó Guarderas de Cesti a compensation of
US$ 10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars), Margarita del Carmen Cesti Cardó
de Lama a compensation of US$ 5,000.00 (five thousand United States dollars), and
Gustavo Guillermo Cesti Cardó a compensation of US$ 5,000.00 (five thousand United
States dollars) or the equivalent in Peruvian currency, for non-pecuniary damage[;]
[...]
4. to order the State of Peru to pay Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado, as compensation for
the costs and expenses generated in the internal jurisdiction and in the inter-American
jurisdiction, the sum of US$ 20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States dollars) or the
equivalent in Peruvian currency, an amount that includes professional fees[;]
[...]
5. to order the State of Peru to investigate the facts of the instant case, identify and
punish those responsible and adopt any provisions of domestic law that may be
necessary to ensure compliance with this obligation[;]

Select target paragraph3