ORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF NOVEMBER 20, 2015 CASES OF HILAIRE, CONSTANTINE AND BENJAMIN ET AL. AND OF CAESAR v. TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH JUDGMENT HAVING SEEN: 1. The Judgments on merits, reparations and costs delivered by the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”) on June 21, 2002 1, and on March 11, 2005 2, in the cases of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. and Caesar, respectively, both against the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (hereinafter “the State” or “Trinidad and Tobago”). In the Judgment of the case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., the Court declared that the State was responsible for the violation of the right to life, the right to personal integrity, the right to personal liberty, the right to a fair trial and the right to judicial protection protected in the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”), in detriment of 32 persons convicted of murder and sentenced to death penalty under the Offences Against the Person Act, which provided said mandatory penalty for such offence 3. In the Judgment in the case of Caesar, the State was held responsible for the violation of the right to personal integrity, the right to a fair trial and the right to judicial protection in detriment of Mr. Winston Caesar, for the execution of a 20 year prison sentence with hard labor and 15 strokes of the “cat-o-nine tails” in 1998. This, after being convicted in 1992 of the offense of attempted rape, in accordance with the Offences Against the Person Act 4. In both cases, the Court determined that its Judgments constituted, per se, a form of 1 Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of June 21, 2002. Series C No. 94. The complete text of this Judgment is available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/Seriec_94_esp.pdf. The present Judgment was notified on July 5, 2002. 2 Cf. Case of Caesar V. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 11, 2005. Series C No. 123. The complete text of this Judgment is available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_123_esp.pdf. The present Judgment was notified on April 8 2005. 3 The 32 victims attended the internal procedures for the review of their convictions; in some cases the guarantees of due process were violated due to certain factors such as the undue delay of the process, the absence of legal assistance and other types of specialized assistance. In addition, the detention of all the victims was perpetrated under extreme overcrowding and poor hygiene conditions. By the time of emission of the Judgment, 30 of the 32 victims were still prisoners in Trinidad and Tobago waiting to be hanged, with exception of Joey Ramiah, who had already been executed, and Wayne Matthews, whose sentence was commuted. 4 The rules that authorized the corporal punishments in Trinidad and Tobago were set out in two laws, being the “Corporal Punishment Act” one of these. On February 5, 1998, Mr. Caesar was subjected to 15 lashes with “the cat-o-nine tales” in pursuance of his sentence. By the time of this Court´s Judgment, Mr. Caesar had fulfilled 13 of the 20 years of his conviction. Also, the Court established that the State failed to comply with the rules on detention conditions, given that between the years of 1991 and 1999, Mr. Caesar was subjected to overcrowding, poor hygiene conditions, lack of light and ventilation, and inadequate medical treatment.