ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
OF MAY 27, 1998
PROVISIONAL MEASURES REQUESTED BY THE
INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
IN THE MATTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
JAMES, BRIGGS, NOEL, GARCIA AND BETHEL CASES
HAVING SEEN:
1.
The communication of May 22, 1998, in which the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission”) submitted to the Inter-American Court of
Human Rights (hereinafter “the Court”), pursuant to Article 63(2) of the American
Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”)
and Article 25 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”),
a request for provisional measures on behalf of Wenceslaus James, Anthony Briggs,
Anderson Noel, Anthony Garcia and Christopher Bethel, in connection with Cases 11.814,
11.815, 11.854, 11.855 and 11.857, respectively, currently before the Commission against
the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (hereinafter “the State” or “Trinidad and Tobago”).
2.
upon
The aforesaid communication, in which the Commission requested the Court to call
the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago to stay the executions of the individuals on death´s row in
the five cases at issue until such time as the Commission has had the opportunity to examine and
decide these cases pursuant to the Convention and the Commission´s Regulations.
3.
The facts mentioned in the Commission´s request, which are summarized as follows:
a) The cases, 11.814, 11.815, 11.854, 11.855, and 11.857, were presented before
the Commission between October 7 and December 17, 1997. The alleged victims
in each of the five cases at issue have been sentenced to death and requested the
adoption of precautionary measures in order to suspend the dates of their
imminent executions until after the Commission has had the opportunity to set
forth its opinions;
b) in each of the five cases, the alleged victims claim before the Commission that the
State has violated specific rights of the American Convention to their detriment;
c) in each of the five cases, the Commission adopted the precautionary measures
requested by the petitioner and notified the State of this decision. However, the
State did not respond to the requests for precautionary measures and, in a latter
statement, alleged that the Commission does not have jurisdiction either by its
acts or omissions to prevent in any way a sentence, authorized by the
Constitution and laws of Trinidad and Tobago and pronounced by a Court of