61
187) The Court deems that although a violation
was not specifically alleged by the Commission
appearing only in its final arguments, the Tribunal
the issue by virtue of the aforementioned general
(supra para. 107). 144
of Article 4(6) of the Convention
in the Hilaire Case Application,
is not prevented from examining
legal principle of iura novit curia
188) Article 4(6) of the American Convention, when read together with Articles 8
and 1(1), places the State under the obligation to guarantee that an offender
sentenced to death may effectively exercise this right. Accordingly, the State has a
duty to implement a fair and transparent procedure by which an offender sentenced
to death may make use of all favourable evidence deemed relevant to the granting of
mercy.
189) The Court considers that the application of the procedure for granting mercy
to the thirty-two victims of the present Case was characterized by a lack of
transparency, lack of available information and lack of participation by the victims,
resulting in a violation of Article 4(6), in conjunction with Articles 8 and 1(1) of the
American Convention. Therefore the Court finds violations to the detriment of Haniff
Hilaire, George Constantine, Wenceslaus James, Denny Baptiste, Clarence Charles,
Keiron Thomas, Anthony Garcia, Wilson Prince, Darrin Roger Thomas, Mervyn
Edmund, Samuel Winchester, Martin Reid, Rodney Davis, Gangadeen Tahaloo, Noel
Seepersad, Wayne Matthews, Alfred Frederick, Natasha De Leon, Vijay Mungroo,
Phillip Chotalal, Naresh Boodram, Joey Ramiah, Nigel Mark, Wilberforce Bernard,
Steve Mungroo, Peter Benjamin, Krishendath Seepersad, Allan Phillip, Narine
Sooklal, Amir Mowlah, Mervyn Parris and Francis Mansingh.
XIII
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 4 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION
(Non-compliance with the Provisional Measures ordered by the Court with
respect to Joey Ramiah, Case No. 12,129)
Contentions of the Commission
190) The Inter-American Commission distinguished the situation of Joey Ramiah in
Case No. 12,129 (Naresh Boodram and Joey Ramiah), who was declared guilty of
murder and sentenced to the "mandatory death penalty" under Trinidad and
Tobago’s Offences Against the Person Act.
191) The Commission indicated that despite the fact that the Court expanded its
provisional measures in the James et. al Case on May 25, 1999 to include Joey
Ramiah, the State executed him on June 4, 1999, while his case was pending before
the inter-American human rights system.
192) The Commission states that by executing Joey Ramiah, the State is
responsible for grave violations of Articles 4(1), 5(1), and 5(2) of the Convention by
virtue of arbitrarily depriving him of his life without due respect for his mental,
144
Cf. I/A Court H.R., Durand and Ugarte Case, supra note 109, para. 76; I/A Court H.R., Castillo
Petruzzi et al. Case, supra note 66, para. 166; and I/A Court H.R., Godínez Cruz Case, supra note 68,
para. 172.
Seleccionar párrafo de destino3
Conectar a un párrafo
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Añadir a la tabla de contenidos