REPORT Nº 65/08 1
July 25, 2008



This report addresses the admissibility of petition 460-00, opened
by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the
Commission” or “IACHR”), in response to a complaint that was received on
September 11, 2000 from Mr. Victorio Spoltore against the Republic of
Argentina (hereinafter “Argentina” or “the State”). The petitioner alleges that
the State has incurred international liability under the American Convention
on Human Rights (hereinafter the “American Convention” or “the Convention”)
for denial and delay of justice to the detriment of Mr. Victorio Spoltore.
The petition indicates that on June 30, 1988, Mr. Victorio
Spoltore filed suit against his former employer for occupational sickness,
alleging that he had suffered damage to his health as a result of working at
that job. The petitioner indicates that the State was responsible for
unwarranted delay during the labor proceedings because Labor Tribunal No. 3
did not issue the judgment denying the employer’s responsibility until nine
years after the suit was initially filed. He adds that he appealed this judgment
through a recurso de inaplicabilidad (appeal for reversal of a decision which
contradicts established doctrine) and a recurso de nulidad (motion to vacate
based on procedural violations), which three years later were resolved
unfavorably for the petitioner.
The petitioner added that, simultaneous to the issuance of the
judgment, he went before the Supreme Court of the Province of Buenos Aires
to request an investigation of the delay and negligence perpetrated by the
labor court of the first instance. In response, the petitioner alleges, although
the Supreme Court agreed that there had in fact been a delay of justice, it
merely reprimanded the clerk of the court.
The State, for its part, maintains that Mr. Victorio Spoltore had
not exhausted the remedies available under domestic law to correct the
1 Commission member Víctor E. Abramovich, an Argentine national, participated in neither
the deliberations nor the decision in this case, pursuant to Article 17(2)(a) of the Rules of
Procedure of the Commission.

Select target paragraph3