ORDER OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
OF MAY 30, 2013
CASE OF RODRÍGUEZ VERA ET AL. v. COLOMBIA

HAVING SEEN:
1.
The brief of February 9, 2012, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the
Court”) this case against the Republic of Colombia (hereinafter “Colombia” or “the State”).
2.
The brief of June 25, 2012, in which the representatives of the presumed victims
(hereinafter “the representatives”) presented their brief with pleadings, motions and
evidence in relation to this case (hereinafter “the pleadings and motions brief”).
3.
The brief of November 24, 2012, in which the State presented its brief with
preliminary objections, its answer to the submission of the case, and its observations on the
pleadings and motions brief (hereinafter “answering brief”). In this brief the State asked
that a special hearing be held on the preliminary objections and, in particular, on the
alleged nullity of an act of the Commission.
4.
The briefs of March 17, 2013, in which the Inter-American Commission and the
representatives presented their respective observations on the preliminary objections filed
by the State.
5.
The communication of March 22, 2013, in which the State reiterated its request “for
an independent hearing, prior to the hearing on merits, reparations and costs, under Article
42(5) of the Rules of Procedure, in order to present the legal and factual grounds on which
the objections and the nullity alleged by the State are founded.”
6.
The notes of the Secretariat of the Court of April 10, 2013, in which it advised the
parties and the Commission that the Court would be informed of the State’s request for the
pertinent effects, and the Inter-American Commission and the representatives were granted
a specific time frame for presenting any observations they deemed pertinent on the State’s
request (supra having seen paragraphs 3 and 5).
7.
The briefs of April 17, 2013, in which the Inter-American Commission and the
representatives presented their observations on the State’s request.
CONSIDERING THAT:
1.
Article 42(5) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure establishes that “[w]hen the Court
considers it essential, it may convene a special hearing on the preliminary objections
presented, after which it shall rule thereon.” Furthermore, Article 42(6) stipulates that
“[t]he Court may decide upon the preliminary objections, the merits, and the reparations
and costs of the case in a single judgment.”

Select target paragraph3