REPORT No. 41/17
CASE 12.701
MERITS
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DISCHARGED AND RETIRED STAFF FROM
THE NATIONAL TAX ADMINISTRATION SUPERINTENDENCE
PERU1
MAY 23, 2017

I.

SUMMARY

1.
Between November 1998 and October 2004, the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights (hereinafter “the Commission”, “the Inter-American Commission” or “IACHR”) received four petitions,
in which the allegation was that the Republic of Peru (hereinafter “the State”, “the Peruvian State” or “Peru”)
was responsible for failure to comply with a court judgment from the Supreme Court, dated October 1993,
which recognized pension rights for 703 individuals.
2.
The State recognized that the legal proceedings aimed at determining the specific pension
for the alleged victims are in the execution stage. It claimed that the delay in the execution of the judgment
issued in October 1993 was due to dilatory acts on the part of the alleged victims, and that, in any case, the
SUNAT [the Superintendence] had been granting them the pensions. It was highlighted that the alleged
victims have had every judicial guarantee in the different legal proceedings that were initiated.
3.
After analyzing the available information, the Commission has concluded that the Peruvian
State is responsible for the violation of the rights to judicial guarantees, private property and judicial
protection established as per Articles 8.1, 21 and 25.2.c) in the American Convention, referring to the
obligations established as per Articles 1.1 and 2 in the same legal instrument, against the individuals
identified in the only Annex to this Report.
II.

PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

Case 12.701
4.
On November 11, 1998, August 27, 2003 and October 8, 2004, the Commission received
three petitions in favor of a total of 703 individuals. The proceedings, from the presentation of the petitions to
the decision about admissibility, are detailed in Admissibility Report No. 21/092.
5.
The Commission presented Admissibility Report No. 21/09 to the petitioners and the State
via a communication dated April 1, 2009. Also, the IACHR placed itself at the disposal of the parties to reach
an amicable solution. On June 1 and 3, 2009, the petitioners and the State submitted their respective
background observations, and afterwards the IACHR received communications from both parties, that were
duly submitted.
Case 12.382
6.
On December 15, 1999, the IACHR received the initial petition indicating Mr. Rafael Ipanaqué
Centeno as the alleged victim. On July 30, 2001, the Commission submitted the petition to the State, which
presented its report on October 1, 2001. On October 19, 2001, the IACHR sent a communication to the parties
indicating that, based on Article 37.3 of its Regulations then in force and “taking into account the position of

1 As per provisions in Article 17.2 of the Commission Regulations, Commissioner Francisco Eguiguren, a Peruvian citizen, did
not participate in the discussion or the decision in this case.
2 IACHR, Report No. 21/09, Petitions 965-98, 638-03 and 1044-04 Accumulated, Admissibility, National Association of
Discharged and Retired Staff from the National Tax Administration Superintendence, Peru, March 19, 2009.

1

Select target paragraph3