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