Order of the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights∗
of September 21, 2009
Case of Palamara Iribarne v. Chile
(Monitoring Compliance with Judgment)

HAVING SEEN:

1.
The Judgment on merits, reparations, and costs (hereinafter, “the Judgment”)
delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American
Court”, “the Court”, or “the Tribunal”) on November 22, 2005.
2.
The Order on monitoring compliance with Judgment issued by the Inter-American
Court on November 30, 2007 (hereinafter, “the Order”), whereby the Court decided to keep
open the proceedings regarding the items pending compliance in the instant case, to wit:
a)
Take all necessary measures to annul and amend, within a reasonable period of time, any
domestic provisions which are incompatible with the international standards regarding freedom of
thought and expression, in the terms of paragraphs 254 and 255 of the […] Judgment (operative
paragraph thirteen of the Judgment […]);
b)
Align the domestic legal system to the international standards regarding criminal military
jurisdiction within a reasonable period of time, so that in case it considers the existence of a
military criminal jurisdiction to be necessary, this must be restricted only to crimes committed by
military personnel in active service. Therefore, the State shall set limits to the material and
personal jurisdiction of the military courts through its legislation, so that under no circumstances
may a civilian be subjected to the jurisdiction of military criminal courts (operative paragraph
fourteen of the Judgment […]), and
c)
Guarantee due process in the military criminal jurisdiction, and judicial protection
regarding the actions of military authorities (operative paragraph fifteen of the Judgment […]).

3.
The briefs of May 30, August 12 and September 9, 2008, and of June 11, 2009 and
their respective annexes, among other submitted briefs, whereby the Republic of Chile
(hereinafter, “the State” or “Chile”) reported on the items of the Judgment pending
compliance.
4.
The briefs of June 23 and October 21, 2008 and of July 16, 2009, whereby the
victim’s representatives (hereinafter, “the representatives”) submitted their comments to
the reports of the State on the items of the Judgment which are pending compliance.
5.
The briefs of November 24, 2008 and July 31, 2009, whereby the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the Inter-American Commission” or “the
∗

Judge Cecilia Medina-Quiroga, of Chilean nationality, excused herself from hearing the instant case
pursuant to Articles 19(2) of the Statute and 19 (currently, 20) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court. Accordingly,
said Judge did not take part in the deliberation and signing neither of the Judgment nor of the instant Order.

Select target paragraph3