Inter-American Court of Human Rights Case of Tibi v. Ecuador Judgment of September 07, 2004 (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs) In the Case of Tibi, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Court” or “the InterAmerican Court”), composed of the following judges: Sergio García Ramírez, President; Alirio Abreu Burelli, VicePresident; Oliver Jackman, Judge; Antônio A. Cançado Trindade, Judge; Cecilia Medina Quiroga, Judge; Manuel E. Ventura Robles, Judge; Diego García-Sayán, Judge, and Hernán Salgado Pesantes, Judge ad hoc; Also present, Pablo Saavedra Alessandri, Secretary, and Emilia Segares Rodríguez, Deputy Secretary, pursuant to Articles 29, 31, 37(6), 56 and 58 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”)∗ and to Article 63(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”), issues the instant Judgment. I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE 1. On June 25, 2003 the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) filed before the Court an application against the State of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”), which originated in application No. 12.124, received by the Secretariat of the Commission on July 16, 1998. 2. The Commission filed the application pursuant to Article 61 of the American Convention, for the Court to decide whether the State abridged Articles 5(1) and 5(2) (Right to Humane Treatment), 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(4), and 7(6), (Right to Personal Liberty), 8(1), 8(2), 8(2)(b), 8(2)(d), 8(2)(e), 8(2)(g) and 8(3) (Right to Fair Trial), 21(1) and 21(2) (Right to Property) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, all of them in combination with Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) of that same convention, to the detriment of Daniel David Tibi T The instant Judgment is issued pursuant to the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its XLIX Regular Session, through its November 24, 2000 Order, which entered into force on June 1, 2001, and in accordance with the partial amendment adopted by the Court in its LXI Regular Session, through its November 25, 2003 Order, in force since January 1, 2004.