73
(a)
More than 27 years have elapsed without the lawsuits having
concluded or the next of kin of the said persons knowing, through final
judgments that are res judicata and encompass all the masterminds,
perpetrators and accessories after the fact, what happened to these
persons, where their remains are, who was responsible for their forced
disappearance, what punishment was imposed, and what reparation is
legally due to them. This is a result of the situation of impunity that
affects the rights of the next of kin of Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos
José Mancuello Bareiro and the brothers Benjamín and Rodolfo
Ramírez Villalba;
(b)
The obligation to investigate and punish any act that involves the
violation of rights protected by the Convention requires that not only
the perpetrators should be punished but also the masterminds and the
accessories after the fact;
(c)
The State incurred international responsibility when its judicial bodies
did not carry out a serious investigation or punish those responsible;
(d)
The State has the obligation to advance the domestic proceedings until
they reach a conclusion, acting de oficio and not based on the initiative
of the next of kin. In the instant case, the State has not alleged any
convincing reason to justify its delay, because, although a few of the
lawsuits have ended with regard to some of those responsible, they
continue open regarding other individuals. Moreover, some of those
accused originally are now deceased. The State is responsible for the
partial impunity in these cases;
(e)
Regarding Alfredo Stroessner and Sabino Augusto Montanaro, it was
only on December 7, 2000, that orders of preventive detention for the
purpose of extradition were issued against them. The delay in issuing
the preventive detention orders reveals the State’s failure to adopt
genuine measures to comply with its international obligations. Even
though the judge in the case called upon the Government to request
Stroessner’s extradition, the State never made that request nor has it
provided information on any steps it took to promote this extradition
request;
(f)
The State has alleged that the appeals filed by the accused have
delayed the proceedings, but has not specified the dates and provided
details of these appeals. The State has not provided any convincing
reason to justify that, more than 27 years after the facts occurred, the
investigation and the respective judicial proceedings have not
produced any effective results and the extradition of Alfredo
Stroessner ordered during the proceedings has not been executed;
(g)
The delay in initiating the investigations and the failure to initiate them
de oficio, as well as the difficulties that the Paraguayan judicial system
purportedly faces can be attributed to the State itself, and therefore do
not excuse the latter from complying with the obligations it assumed
on ratifying the American Convention; and
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents