REPORT Nº 62/05 1 PETITION 862/03 ADMISSIBILITY ALINA MARIA BARRAZA CODOCEO ET AL. CHILE October 12, 2005 I. SUMMARY 1. On October 24, 2003, the lawyer Nelson Caucoto ("the petitioner"), submitted a complaint to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights ("the Commission") against the Republic of Chile ("the State") for the alleged violation of the rights to a fair trial (Article 8) and to judicial protection (Article 25), together with violation of the obligations to respect rights and to adopt appropriate measures (Articles 1(1) and 2) established in the American Convention on Human Rights ("the American Convention"), for allegedly failing to provide reparation and compensation for the suffering caused to Alina María Barraza Codoceo, Eduardo Patricio, Marcia Alejandra, Patricia Auristela, Nora Isabel, and Hernán Alejandro Cortés Barraza, wife and children, respectively of Mr. Hipólito Pedro Cortés Álvarez, who was assassinated state agents during the military dictatorship. 2 2. With respect to admissibility of the complaint, the petitioner argued that the action of the Chilean courts had closed off the possibility of accessing justice and that the petition meets the requirements of form and substance for admissibility. In response, the Chilean State asked that the complaint be declared inadmissible, as totally out of order, because it deals with events that occurred before the deposit of the instrument of ratification and that had heir origin prior to March 11, 1990. Consequently, and in light of the reservation entered by the State, it argues that the facts of the complaint are expressly excluded from the jurisdiction of the Commission and of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. 1 Commissioner José Zalaquett, a Chilean national, did not participate in the discussion or decision of the case, in accordance with Article 17(2)(a) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure. 2 The petitioner also cited violations of Articles 4, 5, 7, 8.1, 24 and 63(1), which were not supported by the complaint. During its 119th session, the Commission decided to open this case, among others, for the alleged violation of the right to a fair trial. As explained in paragraph 17, below, the core of the petition relates to the rejection of judicial reparations and not to the summary execution of Mr. Cortés.