2. Reservations made to the Convention by the State of Barbados 23. The State of Barbados issued reservations to select provisions of the American Convention at the time of its ratification on November 5, 1981. 10 In the Boyce et al. v. Barbados Case, the State had notably argued that “its system of mandatory capital punishment also falls under the preclusive scope of its reservation, as its laws in this regard have remained unchanged since the ratification of the Convention”. 11 However, with respect to such reservations, the InterAmerican Court stated in the same case that “a State reserves to no more than what is contained in the text of its reservation itself”, 12 that “[i]In this case, the text of the reservation does not explicitly state whether a sentence of death is mandatory for the crime of murder” 13 and as such, “a textual interpretation of the reservations entered into by Barbados at the time of ratification of the American Convention clearly indicates that this reservation was not intended to exclude from the jurisdiction of this Court […] the mandatory nature of the death penalty” 14. Therefore, the Commission does not consider that the reservations made by Barbados upon adoption of the Convention are relevant to the analysis of the admissibility of the present petition. 24. The Commission considers that the reservations by Barbados do not affect its competence to analyze the mandatory character of the death penalty for the crime of murder in Barbados. B. Competence ratione personae, ratione loci, ratione temporis, and ratione materiae of the Commission 25. The Commission will next address the remaining questions with respect to its competence. The Petitioner has locus standi to submit petitions to the Commission, in accordance with Article 44 of the Convention. The petition identifies as the alleged victim Mr. Cadogan, an individual person, whose rights under the Convention the State of Barbados is committed to respect and ensure. The Commission further notes that Barbados is a State party to the American Convention, having ratified it on November 27, 1982. The Commission therefore has competence ratione personae to study the petition. 26. The Commission has competence ratione loci to take cognizance of this petition, since it alleges violations of rights guaranteed by the American Convention that purportedly occurred in the territory of a State party. 10 The text of the reservations made by the State of Barbados with respect to Articles 4(4), 4(5) and 8(2) (e), is the following: In respect of 4(4) the criminal code of Barbados provides for death by hanging as a penalty for murder and treason. The Government is at present reviewing the whole matter of the death penalty which is only rarely inflicted but wishes to enter a reservation on this point inasmuch as treason in certain circumstances might be regarded as a political offence and falling within the terms of section 4(4) In respect of 4(5) while the youth or old age of an offender may be matters which the Privy Council, the highest Court of Appeal, might take into account in considering whether the sentence of death should be carried out, persons of 16 years and over or over 70 years of age may be executed under Barbadian law. In respect of 8(2)(e) Barbadian law does not provide as a minimum guarantee in criminal proceeding any inalienable right to be assisted by counsel provided by the state. Legal aid is provided for certain scheduled offences such as homicide, and rape 11 I/A Court H.R., Boyce et al. Case. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C, Nº 169, § 14 12 I/A Court H.R., Boyce et al. Case, supra note 9 § 17 as taken from The Effect of Reservations on the Entry into Force of the American Convention on Human Rights (Arts. 74 and 75). Advisory Opinion OC-2/82 of September 24, 1982. Series A No. 2, para. 35, and Restrictions to the Death Penalty (Arts. 4(2) and 4(4) American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-3/83 of September 8, 1983. Series A No. 3, paras. 60-66. 13 I/A Court H.R., Boyce et al. Case, supra note 11 § 17 14 I/A Court H.R., Boyce et al. Case, supra note 11 § 17. At para. 16: “the first paragraph of the reservation in question specifically refers to Article 4(4) of the Convention, which excluded the application of capital punishment to political offenses or related common crimes in absolute terms. In this regard, the State explicitly expressed in the text of the reservation its purpose and extent, stating that it “wishes to enter a reservation on this point inasmuch as treason in certain circumstances might be regarded as a political offence”. The second paragraph of the reservation similarly addresses the State’s particular concern over Article 4(5) of the Convention with regard to the application of capital punishment to “persons of 16 years and over or over 70 years of age” 5