45. The Commission notes here that it was the responsibility of the State, through the Public
Prosecutor’s Office, to ensure the beneficiaries’ physical safety, to seek the necessary court
action, and to keep the process moving forward.21
46. The judicial proceedings and the police investigations to identify and prosecute those
responsible for the deaths that occurred at “Urso Branco” Prison since November 2000 are still
underway and have reached very few conclusions.22 There has been an unwarranted delay in
determining who was responsible for these deaths, mainly in the case of the January 2002
massacre in which 27 people died.
2.
Time period for lodging a petition
47. Under Article 46(1)(b) of the American Convention, for a petition to be admissible it must
be lodged within six months from the date on which the party alleging violation of his or her
rights was notified of the final judgment that exhausted domestic remedies. Article 32 of the
Commission’s Rules of Procedure provides that “[i]n those cases in which the exceptions to the
requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies are applicable, the petition shall be
presented within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the Commission. For this
purpose, the Commission shall consider the date on which the alleged violation of rights
occurred and the circumstances of each case.”
48. The massacre at “Urso Branco” Prison –one of the reasons why the case against the
Brazilian State was brought occurred on January 1, 2002. The petition asking the Commission
to open a case against the State in connection with the situation at the “Casa de Detenção
José Mario Alves”, known as “Urso Branco” Prison, was lodged on June 5, 2002, which the
Commission believes was within a reasonable time period.
3.
Duplication of international proceedings and res judicata
49. Nothing in the file of this petition or in any information received by the Commission
suggests that the subject matter of the petition is pending decision in another international
proceeding for settlement or that it is substantially the same as one previously examined by
the Commission. The Commission therefore concludes that the requirements established in
Articles 46(1)(c) and 47(d) of the Convention have been met.
4.
Characterization of the facts
50. The Commission’s prima facie assessment is that the facts alleged by the petitioners tend
to establish potential violations of Article 4 of the Convention, in the case of the persons who
died within the prison; possible violations of Article 5 of the same instrument, with regard to
the conditions under which persons deprived of freedom at “Urso Branco” Prison are held and
with regard to those wounded as a result of the uprising or any other violence; possible
violations of Articles 8 and 25(1) of the Convention with regard to the wounded persons, any
and all persons who may have suffered as a result of conditions at the prison by reason of the
inefficacy of a proper remedy, as well as the next of kin of those who died in the incidents at
“Urso Branco” Prison. All the above in relation to the obligation enshrined in Article 1(1) of the
Convention.
51. Furthermore, and although not alleged in the petition, the Commission,exercising its
authority under the principle of iura novit curiae, decides to examine whether the facts
denounced might also demonstrate noncompliance with the obligation enshrined in Article 2 of
the American Convention. As stated previously, when examining the domestic remedies, the
Commission decided to admit the petition because in its view Brazilian law may not make
Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil (1988): Article 127. The Public Prosecutor’s Office is a permanent
institution, essential to the jurisdictional function of the State, and it is its duty to defend the juridical order, the
democratic regime and the inalienable social and individual interests.” Law 7,347/85 concerning Public Civil Action,
Article 1, paragraph V, and Article 5.
22
Attached is the list identifying the dead by name and the status of the court inquiries or police investigations, which
is based on information provided by both parties.
21
8