Date
Geographical Area
Andean countries
Countries
Venezuela
Keywords
Jurisdiction
Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR)
Case Name
Blanco-Romero et al v. Venezuela
Case Reference
Series C No. 138
Name of Court
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Key Facts
On 16 December 1999 the National Constituent Assembly in Venezuela declared a state of alarm owing to heavy rain causing treacherous mudslides at the Avila foothills in Vargas State, and empowered the Executive to implement such measures as may be necessary to prevent further damage and address the needs of the population affected by the disaster. In an effort to prevent further damage and restore public order the Marine Corps, Army, National Guard and Intelligence and Preventive Services Sector Bureau (DISIP) were deployed. In the days that followed, a number of human rights violations were carried out by both the Army and DISIP.
In particular, three men (Oscar Jóse Blanco-Romero, Jóse Francisco Rivas-Fernández and Roberto Javier Hernández-Paz) were arrested between 19-21 December without warrants and beaten by members of the Army or the DISIP. Mr. Rivas-Fernández was arrested while staying at a shelter for victims of the floods in Vargas State.
Of note, on 20 October 2000, Venezuela criminalised forced disappearances, and the relevant statute prohibits justification on the grounds of there being a state of emergency.
The whereabouts of the three men remain unknown and the families were unsuccessful in sourcing any information on the arrests as DISIP claimed not to have any records of the three incidents. The domestic Courts refused to rule on any writs of habeas corpus stating that it was inapplicable and that nothing existed for the Court to rule on regarding the forced disappearance of the three men.
In particular, three men (Oscar Jóse Blanco-Romero, Jóse Francisco Rivas-Fernández and Roberto Javier Hernández-Paz) were arrested between 19-21 December without warrants and beaten by members of the Army or the DISIP. Mr. Rivas-Fernández was arrested while staying at a shelter for victims of the floods in Vargas State.
Of note, on 20 October 2000, Venezuela criminalised forced disappearances, and the relevant statute prohibits justification on the grounds of there being a state of emergency.
The whereabouts of the three men remain unknown and the families were unsuccessful in sourcing any information on the arrests as DISIP claimed not to have any records of the three incidents. The domestic Courts refused to rule on any writs of habeas corpus stating that it was inapplicable and that nothing existed for the Court to rule on regarding the forced disappearance of the three men.
Decision and Reasoning
The Court decided unanimously to ratify the Order of 28 June 2005 in which Venezuela’s acknowledgement of international liability was admitted.
The Court also held a unanimous violation of Articles 4 (right to life); 5 (right to humane treatment); 7 (right to personal liberty); 8 (right to a fair trial) and 25 (judicial protection) of the American Convention on Human Rights. Each of the three men were subject to a violent arrest and detention without any opportunity to avail themselves of the justice system.
Furthermore, the Court held the State failed to comply with its obligations under Articles 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture and additionally Articles I, X and XI of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. The State’s failure to produce any records of arrest/detention, or any information surrounding the whereabouts of the three men or their mortal remains was deemed a clear violation of these Articles.
Moreover, the Court held that Venezuela was in violation of the above listed Articles to the detriment of the three men’s next of kin. The disappearances had a substantial impact on their lives as a whole. The Court held that they had “greatly suffered to the detriment of their psychological and moral integrity”.
The Court also held a unanimous violation of Articles 4 (right to life); 5 (right to humane treatment); 7 (right to personal liberty); 8 (right to a fair trial) and 25 (judicial protection) of the American Convention on Human Rights. Each of the three men were subject to a violent arrest and detention without any opportunity to avail themselves of the justice system.
Furthermore, the Court held the State failed to comply with its obligations under Articles 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture and additionally Articles I, X and XI of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. The State’s failure to produce any records of arrest/detention, or any information surrounding the whereabouts of the three men or their mortal remains was deemed a clear violation of these Articles.
Moreover, the Court held that Venezuela was in violation of the above listed Articles to the detriment of the three men’s next of kin. The disappearances had a substantial impact on their lives as a whole. The Court held that they had “greatly suffered to the detriment of their psychological and moral integrity”.
Outcome
The Court held that Venezuela must carry out investigations and unbiased judicial proceedings on the three forced disappearances, resulting in the discovery of truth and the punishment of those found responsible, and publish the Proven Facts of the judgment within six months in the Official Gazette and other national daily papers.
Venezuela must make the necessary legislative changes in order for writs of habeas corpus to be effectively processed in cases of forced disappearance, as well as updating its criminal laws to bring them in line with international standards on the protection of individuals regarding forced disappearance.
The State will provide training to officers of the Army and DISIP on human rights principles and pay pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages to the three men and their next of kin, in addition to all costs and expenses for both domestic and international proceedings.
Venezuela must make the necessary legislative changes in order for writs of habeas corpus to be effectively processed in cases of forced disappearance, as well as updating its criminal laws to bring them in line with international standards on the protection of individuals regarding forced disappearance.
The State will provide training to officers of the Army and DISIP on human rights principles and pay pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages to the three men and their next of kin, in addition to all costs and expenses for both domestic and international proceedings.
Link
Disclaimer
This case law summary was developed as part of the Disaster Law Database (DISLAW) project, and is not an official record of the case.
Document
Document