I
REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT
1.
On September 7, 2022, the Inter-American Court issued the judgment in this case, of
which the parties and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter also "the
Commission") were notified on December 16, 2022.
2.
On March 9, 2023, the representative of Víctor Henrry Mina Cuero 1 filed a request for
interpretation of the scope of the reparations ordered, specifically on (i) Mr. Mina Cuero’s
right to social benefits, with a view to his future retirement, and (ii) the validity of the sanction
imposed on him leading to his dismissal from the position of police officer.
3.
On March 21, 2023, in accordance with Article 68(2) of the Rules of Procedure, and
upon instructions from the President of the Court, the Office of the Registrar of the Court
forwarded the request for interpretation to the State and to the Commission, and granted
them a deadline of April 21, 2023, to submit any written observations they deemed pertinent.
On April 21, 2023, the Commission and the State submitted their respective observations.
II
JURISDICTION
4.
Article 67 of the American Convention establishes as follows:
The judgment of the Court shall be final and not subject to appeal. In case of disagreement as to the
meaning or scope of the judgment, the Court shall interpret it at the request of any of the parties,
provided the request is made within ninety days from the date of notification of the judgment.
5.
In accordance with this article, the Inter-American Court is competent to interpret its
judgments. To analyze a request for interpretation and resolve it as necessary, the Court
must, if possible, have the same composition as when it handed down the corresponding
judgment, in accordance with Article 68(3) of its Rules of Procedure. At this time, the Court
is composed of the same judges that handed down the judgment of which interpretation is
requested. 2
III
ADMISSIBILITY
6.
It falls to the Court to verify that the request presented by the representative meets
the requirements established in the norms applicable to a request for interpretation of
judgment—that is, Article 67 of the Convention and Article 68 of the Rules of Procedure.
Additionally, Article 31(3) of the Rules of Procedure establishes that “Judgments and orders
of the Court may not be contested in any way.”
7.
The Court notes that the representative submitted the request for interpretation within
the 90-day period established in Article 67 of the Convention. Indeed, the judgment was
notified on December 16, 2022, and therefore, the request for interpretation—filed on March
9, 2023—is admissible as far as the deadline for its submission is concerned. With regard to
the other requirements, the Inter-American Court will perform the corresponding analysis in
1
The victim is represented by César Duque, an attorney with the Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos
(CEDHU).
2
This judgment was deliberated and approved during the 160th regular sessions.
2