Order of the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
of July 10, 2007
Molina Theissen v. Guatemala
(Monitoring Compliance with Judgment)

HAVING SEEN:
1.
The judgment on merits delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
(hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”) on May 4, 2004, in which it:
DECID[ED]:
unanimously,
1.
To reaffirm its Order of April 26, 2004, in which it considered that the preliminary
objections filed by the State had been withdrawn and accepted the State’s acknowledgement of
its international responsibility.
2.

To declare that the dispute concerning the facts that gave rise to this case have ceased.

3.
To declare, in accordance with the terms of the State’s acknowledgement of its
international responsibility and with the facts that have been established, that the State violated
the rights embodied in Articles 4(1) (Right to Life), 5(1) and 5(2) (Right to Humane Treatment),
7 (Right to Personal Liberty), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial), 17 (Rights of the Family), 19 (Rights of the
Child) and 25 (Judicial Protection) of the American Convention on Human Rights, and that it
failed to comply with the obligations established in Articles 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights)
and 2 (Domestic Legal Effects) thereof, to the detriment of Marco Antonio Molina Theissen; the
State also failed to comply with the obligation established in Articles I and II of the InterAmerican Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons to the detriment of Marco Antonio
Molina Theissen, in the terms of paragraph 43 of th[e] judgment.
4.
To declare, in accordance with the terms [of the State’s acknowledgement of its
international responsibility and with] the facts that have been established, that the State violated
the rights embodied in Articles, 5(1) and 5(2) (Right to Humane Treatment); 8 (Right to a Fair
Trial); 17 (Rights of the Family), and 25 (Judicial Protection) of the American Convention on
Human Rights, and that it failed to comply with the obligations established in Articles 1(1)
(Obligation to Respect Rights) and 2 (Domestic Legal Effects) thereof, to the detriment of the
next of kin of Marco Antonio Molina Theissen: Emma Theissen Álvarez vda. de Molina (mother),
Carlos Augusto Molina Palma (deceased father), Emma Guadalupe, Ana Lucrecia and María
Eugenia Molina Theissen (sisters), in the terms of paragraph 44 of th[e] judgment.
5.

2.

To continue hearing the case at thereparations and costs stage.

The judgment on reparations delivered by the Court on July 3, 2004, in which:
unanimously,
IT DECLARE[D] THAT:
1.

[The] Judgment is per se a form of reparation, pursuant to paragraph 66 [thereof].

AND ORDER[ED] THAT:

Select target paragraph3