REPORT No. 83/11
PETITION 12.145
ADMISSIBILITY
KEVIN DIAL and ANDREW DOTTIN
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
July 21, 2011
I.
SUMMARY
1. On April 29, 1999, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter the “the
Inter-American Commission” or “the IACHR”) received two petitions along with requests for
precautionary measures from Herbert-Smith LLP1 (“the petitioners”) against the Government
of Trinidad and Tobago (“Trinidad & Tobago” or the “the State”). The petitions were presented
on behalf of Kevin Dial and Andrew Dottin (“the alleged victims”), two Trinidadian nationals
who at that time were inmates on death row in that country’s State Prison. 2
2. The petitioners indicated that the alleged victims were tried and convicted as co-defendants
for the murder of Junior Baptiste and sentenced to death on January 21, 1997 by the High
Court of Justice of Trinidad & Tobago, pursuant to the country’s mandatory death penalty. The
petitioners subsequently informed the IACHR that, pursuant to constitutional proceedings in
the High Court of Trinidad & Tobago, the alleged victims’ death sentences were commuted to
life imprisonment on August 15, 2008. The petitioners underscore that the late commutation of
the death sentences does not alter the substance of the alleged due process violations during
the alleged victims’ pre-trial detention and trial, nor does it resolve the alleged violations for
the period the alleged victims were on death row. In that regard, the petitioners mainly
complain of three related issues: violations of due process in the course of their arrest, pretrial detention, trial, conviction and sentencing; conditions of post and pre-trial detention; and
the delay in commutation of the alleged victims’ death sentences despite jurisprudence from
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (“the JCPC”) requiring such action.
3. The petitioners note that Trinidad & Tobago’s denunciation of the American Convention on
Human Rights (“the American Convention”) took effect on May 26, 1999. Therefore, they
maintain that the State is responsible for violations of the American Convention with respect to
those facts which took place before that date; as well as for violations of the American
Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Men (“the American Declaration”) that allegedly
occurred after that date: Article I of the American Declaration and Article 4 of the American
Convention; Article II of the American Declaration and Article 24 of the American Convention;
Article XXV of the American Declaration and Articles 5 and 7 of the American Convention;
Articles XVIII and XXVI of the American Declaration and Articles 8 and 25 of the American
Convention; and Articles 10 and 11 of the American Convention. With regard to Mr. Dial, the
petition also alleges a violation of Articles 17 and 19 of the American Convention.
4. The State argues that the petition is inadmissible because the petitioners failed to exhaust
domestic remedies. Moreover, the State denies all allegations related to the merits, principally
because it considers that the petitioners failed to produce substantive evidence of violations of
the American Convention. More specifically, the State contends that the existence of the
mandatory sentence of death for murder is in accordance with international law; the United
Nations Human Rights Committee (“the HRC”) found no breach to the right to humane
treatment arising from prison conditions in Trinidad & Tobago; the IACHR has no competence
to challenge the sentences imposed by the State in accordance with its domestic law; and the
period between the completion of the committal proceedings and the trial was not
unreasonable. Finally, the State concludes that the petitioners are merely seeking to use the
Inter-American Commission as a court of appeal, since no denial of justice can be said to arise
in this case. Accordingly, the State submits that the alleged victims are not entitled to
1
The petitions were originally presented by Slaughter and May. However, in a letter dated August 18, 1999, the
IACHR was informed that effective September 1, 1999 Herbert Smith, LLP would represent Messrs. Dial and Dottin.
2
The Inter-American Commission decided to join the petitions into one single file since the beginning of this
procedure, on May 11, 1999, because of the great similarity in the allegations of facts and law submitted by the same
petitioners.
1