REPORT Nº 29/06 PETITION 906-03 ADMISSIBILITY GARÍFUNA COMMUNITY OF "TRIUNFO DE LA CRUZ" AND ITS MEMBERS HONDURAS March 14, 2006 I. SUMMARY 1. On October 29, 2003, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter the "Commission," the "Inter-American Commission" or the "IACHR") received a petition from the Honduran Black Fraternal Organization [Organización Fraternal Negra Hondureña], OFRANEH, (hereinafter "the petitioner") alleging liability on the part of Honduras (hereinafter "Honduras" or the "State") for violating, to the detriment of the Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz and its members (hereinafter the "Community" or the "alleged victim"), as well as the Garífuna Communities of Cayos Cochinos and Punta Piedra, Articles 8, 21 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter the "American Convention" or the "Convention") in relation to Article 1.1 thereof, and Covenant 169 of the International Labor Organization (hereinafter "ILO Covenant 169"). 2. On December 19, 2003, the IACHR decided to separate the petition according to each Garífuna community and assign a number to each. The number assigned to the Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz was 906-03. Both the petitioner and the State were so advised. 3. The petitioner alleges that the rights established in Articles 21, 8 and 25 of the Convention were violated to the detriment of the Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz and its members because, even though the National Agrarian Institute (hereinafter the "INA" for its Spanish acronym) delivered two property deeds to the Community, one for full ownership [fee simple] and the other to guarantee occupancy of their ancestral lands, possession of the lands has not been undisturbed because of actions by public officials and third parties. 4. The State, for its part, contends that, even though it does not deny the rights of indigenous peoples, in this specific case the petition is inadmissible because the domestic remedies provided by law were not exhausted. Honduras, it adds, is one of a few States that has issued full ownership deeds to indigenous peoples. 5. Without prejudging the merits of the case, the Commission concludes in this report that the case is admissible under Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention. Consequently, it decides to so notify the parties and continue examining the merits regarding violations of Articles 8, 21 and 25 of the Convention, in relation to Articles 1 and 2 thereof. Lastly, the Commission decides to include this report in his Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly, with notice to the parties. II. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 6. The Commission received the petition on October 29, 2003, and assigned it the number 906/03. On January 30, 2004, notice was given to the State, giving it two months to file comments. 7. On March 31, 2004, the Commission received the State's comments. On December 6, 2004, the petitioner submitted additional information and asked that the petition be ruled admissible. 8. On October 18, 2005, during the 123rd regular session of the Commission, a hearing was held with representatives of the parties, who presented arguments on admissibility and provided information in writing. 1