-4Delitos contra el Ambiente (Court for Criminal, Drug-trafficking and
Environmental Offenses) in and for Escuintla to hear over the case […]
against Fermín Ramírez, charged with the crime of aggravated rape.” Said
court ordered that the trial be conducted on April 24, 2006 and then
adjourned the hearing to May 9. “From said [last] date on, the new trial was
conducted as ordered by the Court, but there were certain complications in
localizing witnesses and expert witnesses," as it happened with late forensic
doctor De León-Barrera. Said court delivered a conviction on June 21, 2005
for the crime of aggravated rape and sentenced defendant to 40 years
imprisonment. The conviction “is not final, for it may be appealed against
under [domestic] laws by any of the parties.”
b)
As regards Operative Paragraph ten “the legal framework of the
measure of grace or pardon has been addressed in order to redress the legal
vacuums of [its] laws in force.” The “Committee of Legislation and
Constitutional Affairs of the National Congress issued a supporting report
containing amendments to Bill number 32045, which provides for the
approval of the Ley Reguladora del Recurso de Gracia (Framework Law on the
Measure of Grace).
c)
As regards Operative Paragraph thirteen, “the State […] fully complied
with its obligation by means of a deposit made on December 29 to the
account of the Asociación Instituto de Estudios Comparados de Ciencias
Penales de Guatemala (Institute of Comparative Studies in Criminal Sciences
of Guatemala Association).”
7.
The brief of August 10, 2006, whereby the representatives filed comments on
the reports of the State. In this regard, the representatives stated, inter alia:
a)
As regards the new proceedings against Fermín Ramírez, the trial was
effectively conducted and, on June 21, 2006, the Criminal Court sentenced
the defendant to 40 years imprisonment on the count of aggravated rape.
Said conviction is not final because the defense raised a motion for special
appeal, which is still pending resolution, based on the assertion that Court
must have imposed the minimum sentence;
b)
As regards the obligation to refrain from executing the death penalty
based on the dangerousness of the agent (Article 32 of the Criminal Code of
Guatemala), the State failed to comply with this obligation for, by means of a
judgment delivered on June 15, 2006, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme
Court of Justice dismissed the motion raised by the defendant seeking review
of the judgment rendered in November, 2005 by the Tribunal Primero de
Sentencia Penal, Narcoactividad y Delitos contra el Ambiente (First Trial Court
for Criminal, Drug-trafficking and Environmental Offenses) in and for the
Department of Chiquimula, sentencing defendant to the death penalty on the
grounds of the greater dangerousness of the agent. Said ruling was contrary
to the decision of the Supreme Court in two previous cases where, by
application of the conviction in the case of Fermín Ramírez, it had reversed
the death penalty, commuted the sentence, and imposed the next lower
sentence. Pursuant to the foregoing, this situation "amounts to a failure to
comply with the decisions of the […] Court […] and places 13 people in a
situation of imminent jeopardy by application of a rule contrary to the
Convention;