FURLAN and FAMILY V. ARGENTINA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE OF FURLAN AND FAMILY v. ARGENTINA JUDGMENT OF AUGUST 31, 2012 (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs) In the Case of Furlan and Family, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”), comprised of the following judges1: Diego García-Sayán, President; Manuel E. Ventura Robles, Vice-president; Margarette May Macaulay, Judge; Rhadys Abreu Blondet, Judge; Alberto Pérez Pérez, Judge and Eduardo Vio Grossi, Judge; also present, Pablo Saavedra Alessandri, Secretary, and Emilia Segares Rodríguez, Deputy Secretary, In accordance with Articles 62(3) and 63(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”) and with Articles 31, 32, 56, 57, 65 and 67 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court2 (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”), renders this Judgment, which is structured as follows: 1 Judge Leonardo A. Franco, an Argentinean national, did not participate in the hearing or deliberation of this case pursuant to the Article 19(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, which states that “In the cases referred to in Article 44 of the Convention, a Judge who is a national of the respondent State shall not be able to participate in the hearing and deliberation of the case.” 2 Rules of Procedure of the Court approved by the Court in its Eighty-Fifth Regular Period of Sessions held from November 16 to 28, 2009, which, pursuant to Article 78 therein entered into effect on January 1, 2010. CONTENTS I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE ................ 4 II PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT ............................................................ 4 III PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS ..................................................................... 7 A) “Preliminary objection to the failure to exhaust domestic remedies” ............. 8 B) Lack of jurisdiction ratione materiae of the Inter-American Court to hear arguments regarding the consequences of the application of Law 23.982 of the debt consolidation regimen ...................................................................... 11 C) “Preliminary Objection regarding the violation of the State of Argentina’s right to defend itself during the substantiation of the case before the [Inter-American] Commission” ......................................................................................... 15 IV JURISDICTION ......................................................................................... 20 V EVIDENCE ............................................................................................. 20 A) Documentary, testimonial and expert witness evidence ............................... 20 B) Admission of evidence ......................................................................... 21 B.1) Admission of documentary evidence .............................................. 21 B.2) Admission of the statements of the alleged victims, and of testimonial and expert evidence ................................................ 21 VI FACTS ............................................................................................. 22 A) Sebastián Furlan’s Accident ..................................................................... 22 B) Civil suit for damages and collection of the compensation............................ 25 B.1) Addendum to the complaint .............................................................. 26 B.2) Determination of the defendant ......................................................... 26 B.3. The process after notification of the suit to the General Staff of the Army B.4) Official medical expert witness’ reports on Sebastián Furlan.................. 28 B.5. Judgments of first and second instance .............................................. 32 B.6. Collection of the compensation .......................................................... 34 C) Criminal proceedings against Sebastián Furlan .......................................... 35 D) Medical, psychological and psychiatric assistance for Sebastián Furlan and his 36family ............................................................................................. 38 E) Pension granted to Sebastián Furlan ......................................................... 39 F) Current status of Sebastián Furlan ........................................................... 41 VII RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL, RIGHT TO JUDICIAL PROTECTION AND RIGHT TO PROPERTY IN RELATION TO THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD, RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES AND THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY ........................................... 42 A) Preliminary consideration regarding the legal age of Sebastián Furlan ..... 42 2 B) Preliminary considerations on the rights of children and of persons with disabilities ............................................................................................. 43 B.1. Rights of children ............................................................................ 43 B.2. Children and persons with disabilities ................................................. 44 C) Reasonable term ................................................................................... 49 C.1) Time frame of the proceedings .......................................................... 49 C.2) Complexity of the matter ................................................................. 51 C.3)Procedural activity of the interested party .......................................... 53 C.4)Conduct of the authorities ................................................................. 57 C.5)Adverse effect on the judicial situation of the interested party and impact on personal integrity ............................................................... 62 C.6)Conclusion regarding reasonable time ................................................. 66 D) Judicial protection and right to property ................................................... 66 E) Other judicial guarantees ....................................................................... 72 E.1. Right to be heard ......................................................................... 72 E.2. Lack of participation of the Juvenile Defender’s Office ....................... 75 F) Right to personal integrity and access to justice for the family of Sebastián Furlan .................................................................................... 78 G) General conclusion on access to justice, the principle of non-discrimination and the right to personal integrity of Sebastián Furlan ................................ 85 VIII REPARATIONS .......................................................................................... 86 A)Injured party ........................................................................................... 87 B)Comprehensive measures of reparation: rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantee of non-repetition .................................................................... 88 B.1) Measures of rehabilitation ................................................................ 89 B.2) Measures of satisfaction ................................................................... 93 B.3) Guarantees of non-repetition ............................................................ 93 C. Compensation ....................................................................................... 99 C.1) Pecuniary damages ........................................................................ 99 C.2) Non-pecuniary damage ................................................................ 101 D.Costs and expenses .................................................................................. 102 E.Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund ................ 103 F.Method of compliance with the payments ordered ........................................ 104 XI OPERATIVE PARAGRAPHS ....................................................................... 104 3 I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. On March 15, 2011 the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or the Commission), pursuant to Articles 51 and 61 of the American Convention, submitted to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court the case of Sebastián Furlan and Family v. the Republic of Argentina (hereinafter “the State” or “Argentina”). The initial petition was filed before the Inter-American Commission on July 18, 2001 by Mr. Danilo Furlan in representation of his son Sebastián Claus Furlan (hereinafter “Sebastián Furlan” or the “alleged victim”). 2. On March 2, 2006 the Commission approved Report on Admissibility No. 17/06, and on October 21, 2010 it issued the Report on Merits No. 111/10, in accordance with Article 50 of the American Convention.3 Subsequently, considering that the State has not complied with the recommendations contained in the Report on Merits, the Inter-American Commission decided to submit the case to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court. The Commission appointed Commissioner Luz Patricia Mejía and Executive Secretary Santiago A. Canton as its Delegates, and Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Deputy Executive Secretary, Silvia Serrano Guzmán, Karla I. Quintana Osuna, Fanny Gómez Lugo and María Claudia Pulido, attorneys of the Executive Secretariat, as legal advisors. 3. According to the Commission, this application is related to the State’s alleged international responsibility for the “lack of timely response by the Argentinean judicial authorities, who incurred in an