3
9.
For its part, Article 58 of the Rules of Procedure establishes the following:
1.
The request for interpretation, referred to in Article 67 of the Convention, may
be made in connection with judgments on the merits or on reparations and shall be filed
with the Secretariat. It shall state with precision the issues relating to the meaning or
scope of the judgment of which the interpretation is requested.
2.
The Secretary shall transmit the request for interpretation to the States that
are parties to the case and to the Commission, as appropriate, and shall invite them to
submit any written comments they deem relevant, within a time limit established by the
President.
[...]
10.
The judgment of September 17, 1997 was notified on September 20 to Peru,
which submitted the aforementioned request for interpretation within the time limit
established in Article 67.
III
PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST
11.
The State pointed out, in its request for interpretation, that it refers to the
operative part of the judgment of the Court of September 17, 1997, in which the
Court decided:
unanimously,
1.
That the State of Peru violated, to the detriment of María Elena LoayzaTamayo, the right to personal liberty recognized in Article 7 of the American Convention
on Human Rights, in relation to Articles 25 and 1(1) thereof.
unanimously,
2.
That the State of Peru violated, to the detriment of María Elena LoayzaTamayo, the right to humane treatment recognized in Article 5 of the American
Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof.
unanimously,
3.
That the State of Peru violated, to the detriment of María Elena LoayzaTamayo, the judicial guarantees established in Article 8(1) and (2) of the American
Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Articles 25 and 1(1) thereof, on the terms
set forth in this judgment.
by six votes to one,
4.
That the State of Peru violated, to the detriment of María Elena LoayzaTamayo, the judicial guarantees established in Article 8(4) of the American Convention
on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof.
Judge Alejandro Montiel-Argüello dissenting.
by six votes to one,
5.
To order the State of Peru to release María Elena Loayza-Tamayo within a
reasonable time, on the terms set forth in paragraph 84 of this judgment.
Judge Alejandro Montiel-Argüello dissenting.