REPORT No. 56/19 CASE 13.392 ADMISSIBILITY AND MERITS JULIEN-GRISONAS FAMILY1 ARGENTINA MAY 4, 2019 I. INTRODUCTION 1. On November 11, 2005, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Commission,” “the Commission,” or “the IACHR”) received a petition filed by Eduardo Marques Iraola (hereinafter “the petitioner” or “Mr. Marques Iraola”) alleging the international responsibility of the Argentine Republic (hereinafter “the Argentine State,” “the State,” or “Argentina”) to the detriment of Anatole Alejandro and Claudia Victoria Larrabeiti Yáñez (hereinafter “the Larrabeiti Yáñez siblings” or “Anatole and Victoria”)2 for the failure to make reparation in relation to a military activity carried out on September 26, 1976 at the house where they lived with their family in the province of Buenos Aires when they were four years old and 16 months old respectively. Subsequently, the petitioner also alleged the responsibility of the State for the death of Mario Roger Julien Cáceres (hereinafter “Mario Julien”), and the unlawful deprivation of liberty and subsequent forced disappearance of Victoria Lucía Grisonas (hereinafter “Victoria Grisonas”), the biological father and mother of the Larrabeiti Yáñez siblings, which occurred in the same operation. Also alleged is the unlawful deprivation of liberty of the siblings at a clandestine detention center and their clandestine transfer to Uruguay and subsequently to Chile, where they were abandoned in a public plaza. It also alleges failure to conduct an adequate investigation, impose punishment, and make reparation. 2. On November 21, 2017 the Commission notified the parties of the application of Article 36(3) of its Rules of Procedure, since the petition falls within the criteria established in its Resolution 1/16, and it placed itself at the parties’ disposal to pursue a friendly settlement. The parties had the time periods provided for in the Rules of Procedure to submit their additional observations on the merits. All the information received was duly transmitted between the parties.3 II. POSITION OF THE PARTIES During the processing of the instant case before the Inter-American Commission it had the name “Anatole Alejandro and Claudia Victoria Larrabeiti Yáñez.” Bearing in mind that the report encompasses events that impacted the couple Mario Roger Julien and Victoria Lucía Grisonas and their son and daughter, the name has been changed to “Julien-Grisonas Family.” 2 The first names and last names correspond to their status as adoptive son and daughter. Based on their biological filiation, their names are Anatole Boris Julien Grisonas and Victoria Eva Julien Grisonas. 3 The Commission considers it relevant to make reference to two aspects related to the processing of this case and to other petitions related to its subject matter: On January 8, 1997 Mr. Marques Iraola lodged a petition with the IACHR alleging violations of the human rights of the Larrabeiti Yáñez siblings because of lack of access to the information with respect to the fourth preambular paragraph of Decree No. 1025/96, which will be mentioned in this report. That petition was registered under number P-13-97. In the wake of the State being notified of that petition, the then-Undersecretary for Human Rights responded to the request for information; accordingly, the petitioner considered the search for information to have concluded, and abandoned the petition before the IACHR on October 27, 1997. On November 11, 2005 Mr. Marques Iraola lodged the petition that is the subject of this report with the IACHR. On April 30, 2008, while the petition was in the initial review stage, the petitioner filed a petition that it characterized as “new and different” from the one filed on November 11, 2005. The Executive Secretariat of the IACHR, after analyzing that petition, determined that since it addressed facts intrinsically linked to those referred to in the petition filed in 2005, the second petition should be considered part of the first. On December 15, 2010, the Commission transmitted to the State the original petition received in 2005 along with the information filed during the stage of initial review, including that received on April 30, 2008. During the admissibility phase the parties pursued a friendly settlement, beginning in 2010 and ending in 2017, at the request of the petitioner. By note transmitted on June 15, 2017, the IACHR informed the parties that it was considering its participation in the friendly settlement process to have concluded. As indicated above, on November 21, 2017 the Commission notified the parties that it would apply Article 36(3) of its Rules of Procedure. 1

Select target paragraph3