REPORT Nº 62/05 1
PETITION 862/03
ADMISSIBILITY
ALINA MARIA BARRAZA CODOCEO ET AL.
CHILE
October 12, 2005
I.
SUMMARY
1.
On October 24, 2003, the lawyer Nelson Caucoto ("the
petitioner"), submitted a complaint to the Inter-American Commission
on Human Rights ("the Commission") against the Republic of Chile ("the
State") for the alleged violation of the rights to a fair trial (Article 8) and
to judicial protection (Article 25), together with violation of the
obligations to respect rights and to adopt appropriate measures (Articles
1(1) and 2) established in the American Convention on Human Rights
("the American Convention"), for allegedly failing to provide reparation
and compensation for the suffering caused to Alina María Barraza
Codoceo, Eduardo Patricio, Marcia Alejandra, Patricia Auristela, Nora
Isabel, and Hernán Alejandro Cortés Barraza, wife and children,
respectively of Mr. Hipólito Pedro Cortés Álvarez, who was assassinated
state agents during the military dictatorship. 2
2.
With respect to admissibility of the complaint, the petitioner
argued that the action of the Chilean courts had closed off the possibility
of accessing justice and that the petition meets the requirements of
form and substance for admissibility. In response, the Chilean State
asked that the complaint be declared inadmissible, as totally out of
order, because it deals with events that occurred before the deposit of
the instrument of ratification and that had heir origin prior to March 11,
1990. Consequently, and in light of the reservation entered by the
State, it argues that the facts of the complaint are expressly excluded
from the jurisdiction of the Commission and of the Inter-American Court
of Human Rights.
1 Commissioner José Zalaquett, a Chilean national, did not participate in the
discussion or decision of the case, in accordance with Article 17(2)(a) of the
Commission's Rules of Procedure.
2 The petitioner also cited violations of Articles 4, 5, 7, 8.1, 24 and 63(1),
which were not supported by the complaint. During its 119th session, the
Commission decided to open this case, among others, for the alleged violation
of the right to a fair trial. As explained in paragraph 17, below, the core of the
petition relates to the rejection of judicial reparations and not to the summary
execution of Mr. Cortés.