ORDER OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS *
OF NOVEMBER 26, 2013
CASE OF ATALA RIFFO AND DAUGHTERS v. CHILE
MONITORING OF COMPLIANCE WITH JUDGMENT
HAVING SEEN:
1.
The Judgment on the merits, reparations and costs (hereinafter “the Judgment” or
“the Ruling,”) rendered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the
Inter-American Court,” “the Court” or “the Tribunal”) on February 24, 2012. In this
Judgment, the international responsibility of Chile was established (hereinafter “the State”
or “Chile”) for the discriminatory treatment and arbitrary interference in the private and
family life of Ms. Atala due to her sexual orientation in the legal process that resulted in the
loss of custody and care of her daughters M., V. and R.. Thus, the Court declared Chile
internationally responsible for violations against: i) the right to equality and nondiscrimination enshrined in Article 24 (equal protection), in relation to Article 1(1)
(obligation to respect rights) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Karen Atala
Riffo; ii) the right to equality and non-discrimination enshrined in Article 24 (equal
protection), in relation to Articles 19 (rights of the child) and Article 1(1) of the American
Convention, to the detriment of girls M., V. And R.; iii) the right to private life enshrined in
Article 11(2) (right to privacy), in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention, to the
detriment of Karen Atala Riffo; iv) Articles 11(2) (right to privacy) and 17(1) (rights of the
family), in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention to the detriment of Karen
Atala Riffo and daughters M., V. and R.; v) the right to a hearing, enshrined in Article 8(1)
(right to a fair trial [judicial guarantees)], in relation to Articles 19 (rights of the child) and
1(1) of the American Convention to the detriment of M. V. and R., and vi) the right to the
judicial guarantee of impartiality enshrined in Articles 8(1), in relation to Article 1(1) of the
American Convention, in regard to the disciplinary investigation, to the detriment of Karen
Atala Riffo.
2.

The following reparations were ordered in the Judgment:
1.
This Judgment constitutes per se a form of reparation.
2.
The State shall provide medical and psychological or psychiatric care, free of charge and in an
immediate, appropriate and effective manner, through its specialized public health institutions to those
victims who so request it, […] this Judgment.
3.
The State shall issue the publications indicated in […] this Judgment, within a period of six
months as of notification of this Judgment.
4.
The State shall hold a public act of acknowledgment of international responsibility with regard to
the facts of this case, in […] this Judgment.

*

Judge Eduardo Vio Grossi, of Chilean nationality, did not participate in the hearing and deliberation of this
Order, pursuant to that provided in Article 19(2) of the Court’s Statute and 19(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the
Court.

Select target paragraph3