2
2.
The
application
September
received at

Inter-American Commission brought the instant case to the Court in an
dated January 13, 1995, attached to which was Report No. 19/94 of
26, 1994. It had originated with a complaint (No. 10.733) against Peru,
the Secretariat of the Commission on November 16, 1990.

3.
In the operative part of the judgment that the Court issued on November 3,
1997, it unanimously decided the following:
…
1.
That the State of Peru violated the right to personal liberty recognized in Article
7 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the
detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.
…
2.
That the State of Peru violated the right to humane treatment recognized in
Article 5 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof,
to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.
…
3.
That the State of Peru violated the right to life recognized in Article 4 of the
American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the
detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.
…
4.
That the State of Peru violated the right to effective recourse to a competent
national court or tribunal, recognized in Article 25 of the American Convention on Human
Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez
and his next of kin.
…
5.
That the State of Peru is obliged to repair the consequences of those violations
and compensate the victim’s next of kin and reimburse them for any expenses they may
have incurred in their representations to the Peruvian authorities in connection with this
case, for which purpose the proceeding remains open.

III
PROCEEDINGS IN THE REPARATIONS STAGE
4.
On December 10, 1997, the President of the Court (hereinafter “the
President” decided the following:
1.
To give the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights until February 10,
1998, to submit a brief and any evidence it may have in its possession for purposes of
determining the compensation and costs in the instant case;
2.
To give the next of kin of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, the victim in the
instant case, or their representatives, until February 10, 1998 to submit a brief and any
evidence they might have in its possession for purposes of determining the
compensation and costs;
3.
To give the State of Peru until April 10, 1998, to make its observations on the
briefs that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the victim’s next of kin
or their representatives submit pursuant to the preceding paragraphs.

Select target paragraph3