DOCSLIB.ORG

The Amparo Proceedings in Venezuela: Constitutional Litigation and Procedural Protection of Constitutional Rights and Guarantees

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Amparo Proceedings in Venezuela: Constitutional Litigation and Procedural Protection of Constitutional Rights and Guarantees Duquesne Law Review Volume 49 Number 2 Constitutional Litigaton: Procedural Protections of Constitutionalism in the Article 6 Americas ... and Beyond 2011 The Amparo Proceedings in Venezuela: Constitutional Litigation and Procedural Protection of Constitutional Rights and Guarantees Allan R. Brewer-Carias Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Allan R. Brewer-Carias, The Amparo Proceedings in Venezuela: Constitutional Litigation and Procedural Protection of Constitutional Rights and Guarantees, 49 Duq. L. Rev. 161 (2011). Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol49/iss2/6 This Symposium Article is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Duquesne Law Review by an authorized editor of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. THE AMPARO PROCEEDING IN VENEZUELA: CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION AND PROCEDURAL PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND GUARANTEES* Allan R. Brewer-Carias'" I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 162 II. THE RIGHT TO AMPARO IN VENEZUELA ........................ 163 III. THE INJURED PARTY IN THE AMPARO PROCEEDING ..... 167 IV. THE JUSTICIABLE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND GUARANTEES THROUGH THE AMPARO PROCEEDING ........................................... 172 V. THE INJURY IN THE AMPARO PROCEEDING .................. 175 VI. THE REPARABLE CHARACTER OF THE HARMS AND THE RESTORATIVE CHARACTER OF THE AMPARO PROCEEDING ........................................... 184 VII. THE IMMINENT CHARACTER OF THE THREATS AND THE PREVENTATIVE CHARACTER OF THE AMPARO AGAINST THREATS .................................. 189 VIII. THE INJURING PARTY IN THE AMPARO PROCEEDING... 193 IX. THE INJURING PUBLIC ACTIONS AND OMISSIONS .................................................... 197 X. THE ADMISSIBILITY CONDITIONS OF THE AMPARO ACTION BASED ON ITS EXTRAORDINARY CHARACTER.. 206 XI. THE MAIN PRINCIPLES OF THE PROCEDURE IN THE AMPARO PROCEEDING ...................................... 210 XII. THE PRELIMINARY PROTECTIVE MEASURES ON MATTERS OF AMPARO ............................................. 219 XIII. THE DEFINITIVE JUDICIAL ADJUDICATION ON MATTERS OF AMPARO ................................................... 225 XIV . CONCLUSIONS .............................................................. 236 * Paper written for the Seminar on ConstitutionalLitigation: ProceduralProtections of Constitutional Guarantees in the Americas... and Beyond, organized by Professor Rob- ert S. Barker, Duquesne University School of Law, Pittsburgh, Nov. 5 and 6, 2010. ** Professor at the Central University of Venezuela; former Sim6n Bolivar Professor at University of Cambridge Law School; and former Adjunct Professor of Laws at the Uni- versit6 de Paris II, and at Columbia Law School, New York. Duquesne Law Review Vol. 49 1. INTRODUCTION The amparo proceeding is an extraordinary judicial remedy spe- cifically conceived for the protection of constitutional rights against harms or threats inflicted by authorities or individuals. It is a Latin American procedural means for constitutional litigation that normally concludes with a judicial order or writ of protection (amparo,protecci6n or tutela), that has been indistinctly called an action, recourse or suit of amparo. 1 This constitutional litigation means was introduced in the American continent during the nineteenth century, and although similar remedies were established in the twentieth century in some European countries, like Austria, Germany, Spain and Swit- zerland, and also in Canada, it has been adopted by all Latin American countries, except in Cuba, being considered as one of the most distinguishable features of Latin American constitutional law. 2 As such, it has influenced the introduction of a similar rem- edy in the Philippines, the writ of amparo, which was created by the Supreme Court in 2007. 3 This specific remedy, providing for the protection of fundamen- tal rights, contrasts with the constitutional system of the United States, where the effective protection of human rights is effective- ly assured, following the British procedural law tradition, through the general judicial actions and equitable remedies, particularly the injunctions, which are also used to protect any other kind of personal or property rights or interests. The amparo proceeding was first introduced in Mexico in 1857 as the juicio de amparo, evolving in that country into a unique and 1. See HtCTOR FiX-ZAMUDIO AND EDUARDO FERRER MAC-GREGOR (COORD.), EL DERECHO DE AMPARO EN EL MUNDO, Edit. Porra, M6xico, 2006; ALLAN R. BREWER-CARIAS, EL AMPARO A LOS DERECHOS Y LIBERTADES CONSTITUCIONALES. UNA APROXIMACI6N COMPARATIVA, Cuadernos de la Cdtedra de Derecho Pdblico, n ° 1, Universidad Cat6lica del Tdchira, San Crist6bal, 1993; also published in LA PROTECCI6N JURiDICA DEL CIUDADANO. ESTUDIOS EN HOMENAJE AL PROFESOR JEStS GONZALEZ PPREZ, Tomo 3, Editorial Civitas, Madrid, 1993, pp. 2.695-2.740; and ALLAN R. BREWER-CARfAS, MECANISMOS NACIONALES DE PROTECCI6N DE LOS DERECHOS HUMANOS (GARANTiAS JUDICIALES DE LOS DERECHOS HUMANOS EN EL DERECHO CONSTITUCIONAL COMPARADO LATINOAMERICANO), Instituto In- teramericano de Derechos Humanos, San Jos6, 2005. 2. See generally ALLAN R. BREWER-CARiAS, CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN LATIN AMERICA, A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE AMPARO PROCEEDINGS (Cam- bridge University Press 2009)., pp. 77ff. 3. See generally Allan R. Brewer-Carias, The Latin American Amparo Proceedingand the Writ of Amparo in The Philippines, 1.1 CITY UNIV. HONG KONG L. REV. 73-90 (Oct. 2009). Spring 2011 The Amparo Proceeding in Venezuela 163 very complex institution exclusively found in Mexico. Not only was it designed to guarantee judicial protection of constitutional guarantees against the State acts or actions, but to perform mul- tipurpose judicial roles, including actions and procedures that in all other countries are separate processes, like judicial review, cassation review and judicial review of administrative actions. In the rest of Latin America the amparo gave rise to a very dif- ferent specific judicial remedy established with the exclusive pur- pose of protecting human rights and freedoms, becoming in many cases, more protective than the original Mexican institution. The institution has been described in various ways, always meaning the same, such as: Amparo (Guatemala); Acci6n de amparo (Ar- gentina, Ecuador, Honduras, Paraguay, Uruguay, Dominican Re- public, Venezuela); Accidn de tutela (Colombia); Proceso de amparo (El Salvador, Peru); Recurso de amparo (Bolivia, Costa Rica, Nica- ragua, Panama); Recurso de protecci6n (Chile) or Mandado de se- guranga and mandado de injun~ao (Brazil).4 In all of the Latin American countries, the provisions for the action are embodied in the constitutions; and in all of them, except Chile, the actions of amparo have been expressly regulated by statutes, particularly in special statutes related to constitutional litigations, with the ex- ception of Panama and Paraguay where the amparo action is regu- lated in the general procedural codes (C6digo Judicial, C6digo Procesal Civil). II. THE RIGHT TO AMPARO IN VENEZUELA Within a mixed system of judicial review, since 1961, the Vene- zuelan Constitution establishes a "constitutional right for amparo" or to be protected by the courts, 5 that according to article 27 of the 4. See generally Allan R. Brewer-Carias, Ensayo de sintesis comparativa sobre el rdgimen del amparo en la legislacidn latinoamericana,in REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE DERECHO PROCESAL CONSTITUCIONAL, No. 9 enero-junio 2008, Editorial Porrfia, Instituto Iberoamericano de Derecho Procesal Constitucional, Mxico 2008, pp. 311-321; Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor, Breves notas sobre el amparo latinoamericano(desde el derecho proce- sal constitucional comparado), in HtCTOR FIX-ZAMUDIO AND EDUARDO FERRER MAC- GREGOR, EL DERECHO DE AMPARO EN EL MUNDO, Edit. Porrdia, M6xico, 2006, 3-39. 5. VENEZ. CONST. ART. 27 (1999); VENEZ. CONST. ART. 49 (1961). See generally, on the action of amparo in Venezuela, Allan R. Brewer-Carias, INSTITUCIONES POLfrICAS Y CONSTITUCIONALES, TOMO V, EL DERECHO Y LA ACCI6N DE AMPARO, Editorial Juridica Ve- nezolana, Caracas, 1998; GUsTAVO BRICEI&O V., COMENTARIOS A LA LEY DE AMPARO, Edit. Kinesis, Caracas, (1991); RAFAEL J. CHAVERO GAZDIK, EL NUEVO RIGIMEN DEL AMPARO CONSTITUCIONAL EN VENEZUELA, Editorial Sherwood, Caracas, 2001; GUsTAVO Jost LINARES BENZO, EL PROCESO DE AMPARO, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Facultad de Ciencias Juridicas y Politicas, Caracas, (1999); HILDEGARD ROND6N DE SANS6, AMPARO CONSTITUCIONAL, Caracas, (1988); Hildegard Rond6n De Sans6, LA ACCION DE AMPARO 164 Duquesne Law Review Vol. 49 1999 Constitution everybody has for the protection of all the rights, freedoms and guarantees enshrined in the constitution and in international treaties, or which, even if not listed in the text, are inherent to the human person. The constitution does not set forth a separate action of habeas corpus for the protection of per- sonal freedom and liberty; which are also protected by the action for amparo. In this latter case of amparo for the protection of per- sonal freedom or safety, it can be exercised by any person in which cases "the detainee shall be immediately transferred to the court, without delay" 6 Additionally, the Venezuelan Constitution has also set forth the habeas data recourse, in order to guarantee the right to have ac- cess to the information and data concerning
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stevenson Case (On Merits)
    REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS RECUEIL DES SENTENCES ARBITRALES Stevenson Case (on merits) 1903 VOLUME IX pp. 494-510 NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONS Copyright (c) 2006 494 BRITISH-VENEZUELAN COMMISSION country of his birth, is to hold in accord with the position of England and the position of the United States of America and is in accord with the wise policy for a state which is growing or anticipates growth by immigration. It can not wisely have a large, foreign, cancerous growth of unaffiliated and unattached population alien to the country, its institutions, and its flag, but in due regard to its own safety it must fix a time when the domicile of the parent's choice shall create a citizen out of the son of his loins born within that domicile. It is the test of nature; it is the test of Venezuela. If citizenship is thereby imposed it is through the father's voluntary, intelligent selection. There must be an end to the citizenship of the national of a country when he is resident and domiciled in some other country. If the father can retain his foreign nationality and impart that to his own son on the soil of the country of his domicile, then may not the son of the son, and so on ad infinitum? The umpire holds that the constitution of 1864 is but explanatory of the meaning of the constitutions preceding upon these questions of nationality, and, that since 1830, a free man born in Venezuela is a citizen of Venezuela; and that therefore Edward A.
    [Show full text]
  • Detailed Table of Contents (PDF Download)
    CONTENTS Preface to the Third Edition xxix Preface to the Second Edition xxxiii Preface to the First Edition xxxix Acknowledgments xiv PART I INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1 THE IDEA OF INTERNATIONAL AND TRANSNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW 3 A. What Are International and Transnational Criminal Law? 3 1. Transnational Criminal Law 3 2. International Crimes 4 3. Treaty-Based Domestic Crimes 5 B. What Is Criminal Law? 6 Henry M. Hart, Jr., The Aims of the Criminal Law 6 Notes and Questions 7 C. Crime and Punishment 9 Prosecutor v. Blaškic´ 14 Notes and Questions 14 D. The Need for Safeguards in the Criminal Law 14 1. The Risk of Overenforcement 15 John Hasnas, Once More Unto the Breach: The Inherent Liberalism of the Criminal Law and Liability for Attempting the Impossible 15 2. The Basic Protections in Criminal Law and Procedure 16 E. Is International Criminal Law Different? The Eichmann Trial 18 Prosecutor v. Eichmann 20 Mark Osiel, Mass Atrocity, Collective Memory, and the Law 21 Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil 23 Notes and Questions 23 xi xii Contents CHAPTER 2 INTERNATIONAL LAW PRELIMINARIES 29 A. The Classical Picture of International Law 29 1. Historical Overview 30 a. Westphalian Sovereignty 31 Island of Palmas (United States v. Netherlands) 32 Questions 33 b. Other Historical Sources of International Law 33 c. The Age of Imperialism 34 d. The Consequences of World War II 35 i. The End of European Dominance 35 ii. Decolonization 35 iii. The Trials of Major War Criminals 35 iv. Human Rights Law 36 v.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Trial Detention in Spain
    European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 18 (2010) 369–402 brill.nl/eccl Pre-trial Detention in Spain José Luis Díez-Ripollésa and Cristina Guerra-Pérezb a) Professor of Criminal Law, Head, Andalusian Institute of Criminology, University of Málaga, Spain b) Deputy Magistrate at the Málaga Provincial Court; Researcher, Andalusian Institute of Criminology, University of Málaga, Spain 1. Introduction Pre-trial detention is generally admitted the most serious precautionary measure a jurisdiction can adopt to ensure an effective prosecution of crimes, as far as it entails deprivation of liberty for the suspect. Accordingly, circumstances and conditions which must be present to make it possible that judicial decision making, as well as the regime and rights applicable to arrested persons and remand prisoners, become very good indicators of the rigorousness of the corresponding criminal justice system. More than that, it is one of the best guidelines to assess how determined national criminal law is committed to observe the rule of law principles, specifically legal safeguards for suspected offenders. The following pages have three goals: First, it is intended to give an overview of the Spanish regulation of both legally considered pre-trial detention measures, arrest and remand detention. Second, relevant data on the number of arrests and remand detentions and its evolution in recent times are reported, together with an illustrative empirical analysis on the factual procedure and contents of the judicial decision making in ordering these precautionary measures. Finally, a discussion on current and would-be alternatives to pre-trial detention in Spanish criminal justice system is presented.
    [Show full text]
  • EMIGRACION and PRACTICE of FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS in LATIN AMERICA: EMIGRATION and FREEDOM in RELATION to RESIDENCE* Allan R
    EMIGRACION AND PRACTICE OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN LATIN AMERICA: EMIGRATION AND FREEDOM IN RELATION TO RESIDENCE* Allan R. Brewer-Carías Professor, Central University of Venezuela; Adjunct Professor of Law, Columbia Law School. Vice President, International Academy of Comparative Law, The Hague It is really a privileged to be able to participate in the 2008 Summer Course of High Qualification organized by Professor Andrea Romano, Dean of the Law School of the University of Messina, in Montalbano Elicona, Sicily. My thanks to him for the unique opportunity to participate in one of his distinguishable efforts to gather students and scholars from different countries to study, with a comparative approach, subjects of constitu- tional law, like this on the “Enunciation and practice of fundamental rights: Emigration and Freedom in relation to Residence.” It is also a privilege to have the opportunity to be, for such purpose, in a unique and notable place for constitutional lawyers, like the medieval village of Montalbano Elicona, in a setting dominated by the splendid Castle origi- nally built by Frederick II of Swabia (1209-1250). This King of Sicily has been considered as the founding father of the Modern Absolute State or the Administrative centralized State, after issuing in 1231, the Constitu- tions of Melfi, considered to be the first code of law designated to organize a centralized the State, regulating in 255 clauses and in three books, all aspects of public law, judicial procedure, and feudal, private, and criminal law. This Liber Augustalis, was intended to be applicable to all * COURSE MATERIALS, for use of the Students of the International Summer School 2008, Università degli Studi di Messina, Virginia Commonwealth University, Universidad de Córdoba, Montalbano Elicona, Sicily, July 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Review and Amparo Proceeding in Latin America a General Overview
    JUDICIAL REVIEW AND AMPARO PROCEEDING IN LATIN AMERICA A GENERAL OVERVIEW Allan R. Brewer-Carías Professor, Central University of Venezuela Adjunct Professor of Law, Columbia Law School (2006-2007) Judicial review of the constitutionality of legislation an judicial protection of constitutional rights have been developing in Latin America since the 19th cen- tury, where the two main judicial review systems known in comparative law1 have been applied, that is, the diffuse (decentralized) and the concentrated (centralized) methods of judicial review. In some cases, one or the other of these methods have been established in the Latin American countries, as the only one existing in it; and in other cases, they have been adopted in a mixed or parallel way, coexisting for the purpose of guarantying the supremacy of the Constitutions. This last solution has been followed in many Latin Ameri- can countries, being possible then to identify a mixed system of judicial re- view, in which the diffuse and concentrated methods of judicial review are combined.2 The main criteria for classifying these systems of judicial review of the con- stitutionality of State acts, particularly of statutes, is referred to the number of courts that must carry out that task of exercising constitutional justice, in the sense that it can be attributed to all the courts of a given country (diffuse method), or only to one single court (concentrated system), whether the Su- preme Court or a special Constitutional Court created for such purpose. In the first case, that is, in the diffuse method, when all the courts of a given country are empowered to act as constitutional judges and control the constitu- tionality of statutes, the system has been identified as the “American system”, because it was first adopted in the United States particularly after the well known Marbury v.
    [Show full text]
  • A Doctrine of Precedent in the Making: the Case of the Argentine Supreme Court’S Case Law
    A DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT IN THE MAKING: THE CASE OF THE ARGENTINE SUPREME COURT’S CASE LAW Alberto F. Garay* INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 259 I. A BRIEF HISTORIC ACCOUNT OF ARGENTINA ............................... 260 1. The Colonial Times ............................................................ 260 2. The Argentine Constitutional Framework ......................... 261 3. The United States Influence on the Argentine Constitution of 1853-1860 ....................................................................... 262 4. European and Latin American Influences on the Argentine Constitutional Text.......................................................... 266 5. Further Constitutional and Political Developments .......... 268 II. ARGENTINE CIVIL LAW TRADITION ............................................. 268 III. THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY AND THE FOUNDATION OF A DIFFERENT TRADITION ............................................................................. 273 1. Introduction ........................................................................ 273 2. The Supreme Court Recording and Reporting of Cases .... 274 3. Origins of a New Style of Adjudicating Cases ................... 275 4. The Previous Legal Background and its Critics ................ 276 5. The Bar Demanded Treating Like Cases Alike .................. 283 IV. HOW THE ARGENTINE SUPREME COURT DEALS WITH ITS OWN PRECEDENT ............................................................................ 284 * J.D.,
    [Show full text]
  • National Case Law on Freedom of Expression
    Original: Spanish National Case Law on Freedom of Expression Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights This book corresponds to chapter V of the 2016 Annual Report of the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression approved on March 15, 2017 by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Edison Lanza Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression INDEX INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................... 7 CASE LAW ON THE IMPORTANCE, FUNCTION, AND SCOPE OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................................................................................................11 CASE LAW ON ENTITLEMENT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ITS DUAL DIMENSION ...................................19 CASE LAW ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF LIMITATIONS TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: GENERAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................................................................................................................23 CASE LAW ON PROHIBITION OF PRIOR CENSORSHIP .....................................................................................................29 CASE LAW ON THE CONDITIONS THAT LIMITATIONS ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION MUST MEET IN ORDER TO BE ADMISSIBLE (THREE-PART
    [Show full text]
  • The Latin American “Amparo”
    THE LATIN AMER I CAN “ AMPARO ”. A GENERAL OVE R VIEW * Allan R. Brewer - Carías Professor, Central University of Ven e zuela Vice President, International Academy of Comparative Law, The Hague Adjunct Professor of Law, Columbia Law School (2006 - 2007) I. THE LATIN AMERICAN AMPARO PROC EEDING 1. The amparo proceeding is a Latin America n extraordinary judicial remedy specifically conceived for the protection of constit u tional rights that can be filed against harms or threats inflicted t o such rights not only by a u- th o r ities but also by individuals. Although being common and indistinctly called as an action, a recourse or a suit of amparo, it has always been configured as a whole judicial procee d- ing which normally concludes with a judicial order or writ of “ protection ” ( word that in Spanish is equivalent to amparo, protecció n or tutela ) . 1 That is * Paper written for the Latin America Workshop on Human Rights & Legal Theory , Leitner Ce n ter for International Law and Justice, Fordham Law School, New York, April 4th, 2008. 1 See Héctor Fix - Zamudio and Eduardo Ferrer Mac - Gregor (Coord.), El derecho de a m paro en el mundo , Edit. Porrúa, México 2006; Allan R. Brewer - Carías, El amparo a los der echos y l i- bertades constitucionales. Una aproximación comparativa , Cuadernos de la Cátedra de Der e- cho Público, n° 1, Universidad Católica del Táchira, San Cristóbal 1993, 138 pp.; also publi s- hed by the Inter American Institute on Human Rights, (Interdiscip linary Course), San J o sé, Costa Rica, 1993, (mimeo), 120 pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Constancia De Entrega): Así Es Como Un Acusado O Demandado Le Indica a La Secretaría Del Tribunal Por Escrito Que Se Ha Recibido Una Denuncia O Demanda
    Junio 2020 Glossary of Legal Terms Glosario Legal A B C D E F G H I J L M N O P Q R S T U V W A Acceptance of service (Constancia de entrega): Así es como un acusado o demandado le indica a la secretaría del tribunal por escrito que se ha recibido una denuncia o demanda. Véase "Service (Entrega oficial)". Acquittal (Absolución): Determinación de un juez o jurado que una persona acusada de un delito no es culpable. Affiant (Declarante): Persona que da una declaración jurada o que jura que los hechos escritos en un documento son la verdad. Affidavit (Declaración jurada): Declaración escrita de hechos realizada bajo juramento ante un agente certificador. Affirm (Ratificar) : Cuando un tribunal de apelaciones dictamina que un fallo de un tribunal inferior es correcto. Alternate Juror (Jurado suplente) : Miembro del jurado que escucha todas las pruebas en un caso pero no ayuda a llegar a un veredicto a menos que se le pida reemplazar a otro miembro del jurado. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) (Resolución alternativa de conflictos) : Procedimiento para resolver un conflicto fuera de la sala del tribunal, como por medio de arbitraje, mediación o resolución de conflictos en línea (ODR, por sus siglas en inglés). Amicus curiae (Amigo del tribunal): Latín para "amigo del tribunal". Este término significa una persona que no es parte en una demanda pero tiene un gran interés en el tema. La persona solicita permiso del tribunal de apelaciones o el consentimiento de todas las partes para presentar un escrito de amicus. Answer (Contestación): Respuesta escrita de un demandado a una demanda o queja.
    [Show full text]
  • Recurso De Amparo Preventivo Recurrente
    PROCEDIMIENTO : ESPECIAL MATERIA : RECURSO DE AMPARO PREVENTIVO RECURRENTE : INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE DERECHOS HUMANOS REPRESENTANTE: LORENA FRIES MONLEÓN, DIRECTORA DEL INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE DERECHOS HUMANOS RUT : 8.532.482-9 A FAVOR DE : K. T. R. Q. RECURRIDO : IX ZONA ARAUCANÍA, CARABINEROS DE CHILE REPRESENTANTE : GENERAL DE CARABINEROS DON NABIH SOZA CÁRDENAS RUT : DESCONOCIDO PATROCINANTE : RODRIGO BUSTOS BOTTAI RUT : 14.131.343-6 PATROCINANTE : PABLO RIVERA LUCERO RUT : 13.672.566-1 PATROCINANTE : MARCOS RABANAL TORO RUT : 12.534.498-4 EN LO PRINCIPAL: deduce recurso de amparo preventivo; PRIMER OTROSÍ: acompaña documentos; SEGUNDO OTROSÍ: solicita se decrete diligencias que indica; TERCER OTROSÍ: solicita informes; CUARTO OTROSÍ: legitimación activa; QUINTO OTROSÍ: notificaciones; SEXTO OTROSÍ: patrocinio y poder. ILUSTRE CORTE DE APELACIONES DE TEMUCO LORENA FRIES MONLEON, Directora del Instituto Nacional de Derechos Humanos (INDH), domiciliada para estos efectos en calle Eliodoro Yáñez nº 832, comuna de Providencia, a S.S. Ilustrísima con respeto digo: Que en conformidad a lo dispuesto en el artículo primero y siguientes de la ley N° 20.405, que crea el Instituto Nacional de Derechos Humanos, y en particular lo señalado en el artículo 2° inciso primero y artículo 3° número 5 de la referida ley, en mi calidad de Directora del Instituto Nacional de Derechos Humanos, vengo en interponer Acción de Amparo en contra de Carabineros de la IX ZONA ARAUCANÍA, representada por el GENERAL DE CARABINEROS DON N. S. C., domiciliado en Temuco, Región de la Araucanía, por vulnerar el derecho constitucional de la libertad personal y seguridad individual, establecido en el art. N 19 N° 7 de la Constitución Política de la República y cautelado por la Acción de Amparo, consagrada en el artículo 21 de la Carta Política, a favor del adolescente K.
    [Show full text]
  • Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 40 of the Covenant
    United Nations CCPR/C/VEN/4 International Covenant on Distr.: General Civil and Political Rights 29 April 2013 English Original: Spanish Human Rights Committee Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant Fourth periodic report of States parties due in 2005 Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela* [18 December 2012] * In accordance with the information transmitted to States parties regarding the processing of their reports, the present document was not formally edited before being sent to the United Nations translation services. GE.13-43090 (EXT) CCPR/C/VEN/4 Contents Paragraphs Page I. Introduction............................................................................................................. 1–10 3 II. Implementation of the articles of the Covenant ...................................................... 11–168 4 Article 1................................................................................................................... 11–18 4 Article 2................................................................................................................... 19–33 6 Article 3................................................................................................................... 34–54 9 Article 4................................................................................................................... 55–61 14 Article 6................................................................................................................... 62–84 16 Article 7..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mixed Claims Commission United States-Venezuela, 17 February 1903
    REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS RECUEIL DES SENTENCES ARBITRALES Mixed Claims Commission United States-Venezuela 17 February 1903 VOLUME IX pp. 113-318 NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONS Copyright (c) 2006 MIXED CLAIMS COMMISSION UNITED STATES - VENEZUELA CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PROTOCOL OF 17 FEBRUARY 1903 REPORT: Jackson H. Ralston—W. T. Shermrn Doyle, Venezuelan Arbitrations of 1903, including Protocols, personnel and Rules of Commission, Opinions, and Summary of Awards, etc. published as Senate Document No. 316, Fifty-eighth Congress, second session, Washing- ton, Government Printing Office, 1904, pp, 1-259. 115 PROTOCOL OF AN AGREEMENT OF 17 FEBRUARY 1903 BETWEEN THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA FOR SUBMISSION TO ARBITRATION OF ALL UNSETTLED CLAIMS OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA 1 The United States of America and the Republic of Venezuela, through their representatives, John Hay, Secretary of State of the United States of America, and Herbert W. Bowen, the Plenipotentiary of the Republic of Venezuela, have agreed upon and signed the following protocol. ARTICLE I All claims owned by citizens of the United States of America against the Republic of Venezuela which have not been settled by diplomatic agreement or by arbitration between the two Governments, and which shall have been presented to the commission hereinafter named by the Department of State of the United States or its Legation at Caracas, shall be examined and decided by a Mixed Commission, which shall sit at Caracas, and which shall consist of two members, one of whom is to be appointed by the President of the United States and the other by the President of Venezuela.
    [Show full text]