merits within a two-month period. On October 6, 2008, the petitioners submitted their comments on the
On November 12, 2008, the Commission asked the State to submit its observations on the
merits within a two-month period. On January 16, 2009, the State submitted a communication to the
Commission expressing its interest in beginning the friendly settlement process. On March 3 of that year, the
petitioners submitted a communication asking for the IACHR to proceed with the merits stage.
Subsequently, the State submitted communications on May 1, 2009 and June 19, 2009. In
turn, the petitioners submitted communications on April 14, 2009, September 26, 2009, August 19, 2011,
October 20, 2011, January 18, 2012 and March 13, 2012. All communications were duly forwarded to the
opposing party.
Then, in its communication of November 8, 2012, the State reiterated its interest in seeking a
friendly settlement. On October 16, 2014, the petitioners submitted a communication to the IACHR asking it
to issue its merits report. Said request was made again on February 26, June 15, and August 18, 2016. In its
communication of October 17, 2016, the State reiterated its interest in seeking a friendly settlement. On
November 3, 2016 the petitioners submitted a communication to the IACHR stating that they were not
interested in a friendly settlement, and asking the Commision to issue its merits report.



Position of the Petitioners

The petitioners alleged that the State is responsible for Mirey Trueba’s death on August 22,
1998, in Baborigame, municipality of Guadalupe y Calvo, State of Chihuahua, as well as for the failure to
adequately investigate and punish those responsible for the crime. They claimed that Mr. Trueba was riding
in a vehicle with his brother and another companion, when they were stopped by members of the Army.
According to their account, one of these soldiers fired 11 shots at him after Mr. Mirey Trueba ran out of the
vehicle in the opposite direction of the soldiers. The petitioners explained that these incidents took place in a
context of the use of the Armed Forces for law enforcement purposes and acts of violence were constantly
committed by soldiers against the residents of Baborigame.
As for the right to life and humane treatment, the petitioners alleged that, after he was shot
by the state agent, Mr. Trueba was not taken to a medical facility because the soldiers refused to allow it. They
contended that Mr. Trueba went three hours without receiving any type of assistance and, consequently,
passed away. The petitioners argued that the refusal to allow Mr. Trueba to receive timely medical care
infringed his right to humane treatment, while he was alive. They further alleged that his right to life was also
violated, inasmuch as his death was caused by shots fired by a member of the Army on duty at the time.
Additionally, the petitioners contended that the soldiers beat Mr. Trueba’s two companions, who pleaded for
him to be taken to a medical facility.
With regard to the right to a fair trial and judicial protection, the petitioners alleged that the
investigation did not fulfill due process requirements. They explained that the investigation was conducted
under the military criminal jurisdiction, which runs counter to international standards. They contended that
only the military officer, who shot Mr. Trueba, was tried and punished for homicide in said jurisdiction. In
addition to arguing that it was not the suitable jurisdiction, they claimed that the punishment of one year and
11 months prison term was not proportional to the crime involved. The petitioners also alleged that Mr.
Trueba’s family members were unable to participate in or follow the developments in the proceedings,
because they were not kept abreast of the case status.
Additionally, the petitioners contended that the State did not conduct an effective and
thorough investigation, inasmuch as it did not investigate criminal liability of the other members of the
military, who witnessed the events, who beat Mr. Trueba’s family members and prevented him from being
taken to a medical facility after he was shot.

Select target paragraph3