Citing jurisprudence of
European Human Rights Court and international agreements, Inter-American Court
of Human Rights finds that Guatemala has violated several articles of
Inter-American Convention by failing to prosecute local police for murders of
"street children"
On December 3, 1999, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
published a decision that Guatemalan police had a part in the killing of four
youngsters and another young man, all of whom were living in the streets of
Guatemala City. Guatemala is one of 20 countries that recognize the
jurisdiction of this Court. The Court found that Guatemala had failed to
protect the victims' rights and to provide them justice under international
law. [Editors' Note: this is the first case before that Court involving the
rights of minors.]
On September 15, 1994, two Guatemalan human rights organizations,
the "Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional" (CEJIL) and
the "Casa Alianza" notified the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights about the violations of human rights directed against young people
living in the streets of Guatemala ("ninos de la calle"). The
complaint alleged the governmental abduction, torture and murder of the above-mentioned
young people of whom three were minors. It also claimed that the government
failed adequately to look into these events, and to make civil remedies
available to the victims' families. [Editors' Note: As reported in the
Washington Post, see Citation below, an estimated 40 million children live in
the streets of Latin America. According to human rights activists, some
Governments occasionally condone or even promote killing sprees against street
people.]
Residents had found the mutilated bodies of the four victims on
the outskirts of Guatemala City in 1990. Several witnesses had implicated two
Guatemalan police officers. The criminal investigation resulted in a
prosecution but the lower courts dismissed it for lack of convincing evidence.
The Criminal Branch of the Guatemalan Supreme Court of Justice (Camara Penal de
la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Guatemala) ultimately affirmed the dismissal on
procedural grounds and for lack of evidence.
The case finally came before the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights for an investigation. On January 30, 1997, the Commission filed a
complaint with the Court under the Convention alleging that Guatemala had
violated several provisions. These included Article 1 (respect for rights),
Article 4 (right to life), Article 5 (right to personal integrity), Article 7
(right to personal liberty), Article 8 (judicial guarantees), Article 19
(childrens' rights), and Article 25 (judicial protection).
The Human Rights Court holds that Guatemala had violated the
Convention. Six judges of the Court write an opinion that builds on the
jurisprudence of other international tribunals and agreements, including
interpretations of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 [312 U.N.T.S. 221] (ECHR) plus the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966 [999 U.N.T.S. 171]
(ICCPR). In its opinion, the Court describes in detail the supporting
documentary evidence and testimony. For example, the mother of Henry Giovanni
Contreras, one of the victims, testified that Henry lived mostly in the streets
of Guatemala City. He was consuming drugs and alcohol, having been arrested
several times. His mother finally found out that police officers had taken him
away. Though his corpse later turned up, administrative obstacles stymied her
efforts to claim the body. Moreover, she received an anonymous threatening
letter.
Bruce Harris, the Regional Director of Casa Alianza, recounted the
hazards of investigating the murders. Even though the photographs of the dead
bodies showed clear signs of torture, the Guatemalan authorities did not take
serious action. Furthermore, one day someone riddled the Alianza's building
with bullets. Finally, three Alianza co-workers later had to flee Guatemala
under threats of harm. Harris testified that the organization had 392 pending
cases of offenses committed against street children. Although 50 or about 13%
were homicides, less than five percent of the total ever got into the local
courts.
Here, Guatemala did not directly contest either the allegations or
the evidence before the Human Rights court. Based on the evidence presented by
the witnesses, the Court finds that Guatemala has in fact violated Articles 4,
5, 7, 8, 19, and 25.
As for Article 4 (right to life), the Court cites the U.N.
Committee on Human Rights (a creation of the ICCPR, above) as declaring that
the State must prevent and punish killings by government forces. The Court also
notes that the European Court of Human Rights has recognized a presumption that
the government must be accountable for the abuse that a person suffers while in
government custody. See ECHR Article 5 (Right to Liberty and Security)
In applying Article 7 on the right to liberty and personal safety,
the Court again refers to the jurisprudence of the European Human Rights Court.
That Court has emphasized that a government's failure to publish a person's
arrest completely ignores these rights.
Moreover, the Court finds Article 19 on the special rights of
children applicable here. It further notes that there is a very comprehensive
corpus juris for the international protection of children that exemplifies the
scope of this Article.
In addition, the Court applies the Inter-American Convention to
Prevent and Punish Torture of December 9, 1985 [25 I.L.M. 519 (1986)]. It
concludes that Guatemala has violated Articles 1 (governments must prevent and
punish torture), 6 (governments must establish effective measures against
torture), and 8 (investigations of torture are mandatory). Guatemala had not
addressed these issues in its final pleadings.
Two judges delivered a concurring opinion, noting that the right
to life can already be considered jus cogens. With this opinion, as well as another
one issued in 1999, the Court has held that courts must interpret an
international protective agreement according to the development of society.
This evolutionary interpretation has decisively advanced the cause of
international human rights. In the interpretation of human rights law, it is
very difficult to separate juridical considerations from moral considerations.
It is therefore within a system of higher values, the Concurring judges argue,
that we search for the meaning and destiny of each human being. It is now up to
Guatemala to investigate the murders and to punish those responsible for the
miscarriages of justice.
Citation: Corte Interamericana de Derechos
Humanos [Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Costa Rica], Caso Villagran
Morales y Otros, Sentencia de 19 de noviembre 1999. [The decision is available
in Spanish from the press department of the Court, E-mail:
infocidh@sol.racsa.co.cr. See also Washington Post (December 5, 1999), page
A-42.]
**** Terik Hashmi is a business consultant serving businesses in the marketing realm. Among his clients are a medical service provider and an Online Reputation Management company. - Attorney Website at: https://terikhashmiattorney.com/ - Attorney Profile at: https://solomonlawguild.com/terik-hashmi%2C-esq# - Attorney News at https://attorneygazette.com/terik-hashmi%2C-consultant#eec97f53-49a0-4c94-869a-4847514cb694