30
82.
In view of the above, the Court concludes that Article 201 of the Guatemalan
Penal Code, on which the sentence of Mr. Raxcacó Reyes was based, violated the
prohibition to arbitrarily deprive a person of their life established in Article 4(1) and
4(2) of the Convention.
iv)
Right to apply for a pardon or commutation of sentence
83.
As described in the chapter on Proven Facts (supra para. 43(17)), Decree No.
159 of April 18, 1892, established the authority of the President of the Republic to
hear and decide on pardons. However, Decree No. 32/2000 expressly revoked this
authority and the pertinent procedure.
84.
Despite the foregoing, Mr. Raxcacó Reyes applied for a pardon before the
Minister of Governance of Guatemala on May 19, 2004 (supra para. 43(18)), basing
his petition, inter alia, on Articles 1(1), 2 and 4(6) of the American Convention. From
the Court’s case file, it is clear that the Ministry of Governance has not processed the
said application for pardon (supra para. 43(18)).
85.
On this point, in a previous case the Inter-American Court ruled against the
State, in the sense that the revocation of Decree No. 159 of 1892, by Decree No.
32/2000, resulted in the elimination of the powers granted to an organ of the State
to hear and decide the right to a pardon stipulated in Article 4(6) of the
Convention.53 Consequently, the Court considered that the State failed to comply
with the obligation arising from Article 4(6) of the Convention, in relation to Articles
1(1) and 2 thereof.54
86.
law.
In the instant case, the Court finds no cause to deviate from its previous case
*
*
*
87.
Article 2 of the American Convention obliges the States Parties to adopt, in
accordance with their constitutional processes and the provisions of the Convention,
such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights
and freedoms that it protects. It is necessary to reaffirm that the obligation to adapt
domestic laws is only complied with when the reform is effectively carried out.55
88.
In this case, the Court finds that, even though Mr. Raxcacó Reyes has not
been executed, the State has failed to comply with Article 2 of the Convention. The
mere existence of Article 201 of the Guatemalan Penal Code, which punishes any
form of kidnapping or abduction with the mandatory death penalty and expands the
number of crimes punishable with this sanction is, per se, a violation of this provision
of the Convention.56 This opinion corresponds to the Court’s Advisory Opinion OC53
Cf. Case of Fermín Ramírez, supra note 1, para. 107.
54
Cf. Case of Fermín Ramírez, supra note 1, para. 110.
55
Cf. Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa, supra note 4, para. 100, and Case of Caesar.
Judgment of March 11, 2005. Series C No. 123, paras. 91 and 93.
56
Cf. Case of Lori Berenson Mejía. Judgment of November 25, 2004. Series C No. 119, para. 221;
Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., supra note 39, paras. 114 and 116; Case of Cantoral
Benavides. Judgment of August 18, 2000. Series C No. 69, para. 176, and Suárez Rosero case, Judgment
of November 12, 1997. Series C No. 35, para. 98.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents