REPORT Nº 88/09 PETITION 405-99 ADMISSIBILITY PATRICIO FERNANDO ROCHE AZAÑA ET AL. NICARAGUA August 7, 2009 I. SUMMARY 1. On December 23, 1998, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the IACHR”) received a petition lodged by Mr. Patricio Barrera Tello (hereinafter “the petitioner”), representing Messrs. Pedro Bacilio Roche Azaña and Patricio Fernando Roche Azaña (hereinafter “the alleged victims”), in which he asserted the State of Nicaragua (hereinafter “Nicaragua” or “the State”) violated the human rights of the alleged victims due to an alleged police attack, supposedly motivated by the alleged victims undocumented immigration status, in which the first alleged victim lost his life and the second was left physically disabled. The petitioner further asserts the State violated basic due process rights by acquitting the alleged perpetrators. 2. The petitioner claims that the State is responsible for violating the rights enshrined in Articles 1.1, 4.1, 5.1, 22.1, and 22.4 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the American Convention”) and Article XVII of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (“the American Declaration”), in conjunction with Articles 24 and 8.1 of the American Convention. The petitioner also asserts the petition should be deemed admissible because all available domestic remedies have been exhausted. 3. In turn, the State claims that the petitioner had access to adequate and effective domestic remedies, and that just because the final judgment was not what was desired by the alleged victims, it cannot be considered an abridgment of their human rights. 4. After analyzing the available information and verifying compliance with the admissibility requirements set out in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention, the Commission rules the case admissible for the reasons set forth below. Based on the allegations and information presented by the parties, the Commission concludes that the petition raises colorable claims of potential violations of Articles 1.1, 4.1, 5.1, 8.1 and 24 of the American Convention. Additionally, by application of the principle iura novit curia, the Commission will analyze, in the merits stage, if there is a possible 1

Select target paragraph3