ORDER OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
OF MAY 17, 2010
ESCHER ET AL. V. BRAZIL
MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH JUDGMENT
HAVING SEEN:
1.
The judgment on preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs
(hereinafter “the judgment”) of July 6, 2009, in which the Inter-American Court of
Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”) ordered, inter
alia, that:
8.
The State must publish once in the official gazette, in another national newspaper with
widespread circulation, and in a newspaper with widespread circulation in the state of Paraná, the
cover page, Chapters I, VI to XI, without the corresponding footnotes, and the operative
paragraphs of th[e] judgment, and must publish the entire text of th[e] judgment on an official web
page of the Federal State and of the state of Paraná. The publications in the newspapers and on the
Internet must be made within six and twelve months, respectively, of notification of th[e]
judgment, in the terms of paragraph 239 [t]hereof.

2.
The brief of January 15, 2010, in which the Federative Republic of Brazil
(hereinafter “the State” or “Brazil”) consulted the Court concerning compliance with
the eighth operative paragraph of the judgment.
3.
The note of January 15, 2010, in which the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter
“the Secretariat”), on the instructions of the President of the Court, asked the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission”
or “the Commission”) and the representatives of the victims (hereinafter “the
representatives”) to submit any observations they deemed pertinent with regard to the
State’s inquiry by January 22, 2010, at the latest.
4.
The brief of January 22, 2010, in which the representatives presented their
observations on the State’s inquiry and, in particular, submitted a proposal concerning
the publication of the judgment.
5.
The brief of January 22, 2010, in which the Inter-American Commission
requested a one-week extension to present its observations on the State’s inquiry,
because it considered it important to take into account the respective observations of
the representatives.
6.
The note of January 26, 2010, in which the Secretariat, on the instructions of
the President of the Court, asked the representatives that, by January 27, 2010, at the
latest, they clarify their proposal concerning publication of the judgment. It also
advised the State and the Commission that they could send their observations on the
representatives’ briefs after the requested clarification had been submitted.

Select target paragraph3