REPORT No. XX/17 CASE 12.650 MERITS HUGO HUMBERTO RUIZ FUENTES and FAMILY MEMBERS GUATEMALA JULY XX, 2017
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
OEA/Ser.L/V/II.163 REPORT No. XX/17 Doc. XX XX March 2017 CASE 12.650 Original: English REPORT ON MERITS HUGO HUMBERTO RUIZ FUENTES AND FAMILY MEMBERS GUATEMALA Approved by the Commission at its session No. XX held on April XX, 2017 163rd Regular Period of Sessions Cite as: IACHR, Report No. Xx/17, Case 12.650. Merits. Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes. Guatemala. July XX, 2017. www.cidh.org REPORT No. XX/17 CASE 12.650 MERITS HUGO HUMBERTO RUIZ FUENTES AND FAMILY MEMBERS GUATEMALA JULY XX, 2017 INDEX I. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION ................................................................................................................... 1 II. POSITION OF THE PARTIES ................................................................................................................................................... 2 A. Position of the petitioners ........................................................................................................................................ 2 B. Position of the State .................................................................................................................................................... 3 III. PROVEN FACTS ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 A. Domestic proceedings against the alleged victim ......................................................................................... 4 1. Arrest and allegations of torture ......................................................................................................... 4 2. Context of the application of the death penalty in Guatemala ............................................... 6 2.1 Petition for pardon and the repeal of Decree 159 of 1892 .................................... 9 2.2 Cases of Fermín Ramírez and Raxcacó Reyes v. Guatemala heard by the Inter-American Court ............................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Death penalty in Guatemala at the present time ...................................................... 10 3. Judgment of conviction and subsequent actions ........................................................................11 3.1 Judgment of conviction ........................................................................................................11 3.2 Special appeal for review of judgment ..........................................................................12 3.3 Appeal of judgment to the Supreme Court of Justice (Cassation) ..................... 13 3.4 Amparo relief ............................................................................................................................14 3.5 Motion for review of judgment (Recurso de revisión) ............................................. 15 3.6 Petition for pardon .................................................................................................................15 4. Death of the alleged victim in the context of Plan Gavilán ..................................................... 15 4.1 Plan Gavilán ...............................................................................................................................15 4.2 Death of the alleged victim following his escape from the jail and the respective investigations ......................................................................................................................16 4.3 Hypothesis about the perpetrators of the killing ..................................................... 17 4.4 Steps taken in the investigation .......................................................................................19 4.5 Other investigations of the consequences of “Plan Gavilán” ............................... 20 IV. LEGAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................................................20 A. Rights to life, a fair trial and judicial protection in the context of the case that culminated in the imposition of the death penalty and the non-existence of a petition for pardon .................. 21 1. General considerations on the standard of analysis in death penalty cases .................. 21 2. Analysis as to whether in the case that culminated with the imposition of the death penalty the rights to a fair trial and judicial protection were respected ......................... 22 3. Analysis as to whether the imposition of the death penalty in the case of kidnapping violated the Convention ........................................................................................................................26 B. Right to humane treatment with respect to the death row phenomenon and relevant provisions of the IACPPT ........................................................................................................................................29 C. Right to humane treatment, a fair trial and judicial protection with respect to the arrest and alleged torture and relevant provisions of the IACPPT ............................................................................31 1. General considerations ..........................................................................................................................31 2. Analysis of case .........................................................................................................................................33 D. Right to life, a fair trial and judicial protection with respect to the death of Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes .................................................................................................................................................................36 1. General considerations ..........................................................................................................................36 2. Analysis as to whether the death of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes was an extrajudicial execution ..........................................................................................................................................................................39 3. Analysis as to whether the State met its obligation to investigate the death of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes ...............................................................................................................................................40 V. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................................... 41 VI. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 41 2 REPORT No. XX/17 CASE 12.650 MERITS HUGO HUMBERTO RUIZ FUENTES AND FAMILY MEMBERS GUATEMALA JULY XX, 2017 1. On January 2, 2003, the Commission received information from the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), the Institute for Comparative Studies in Penal Sciences of Guatemala (ICCPG) and Public Defender Reyes Ovidio Girón of the Institute for Public Criminal Defense of Guatemala (hereinafter “the petitioners”), about criminal proceedings in which Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes (hereinafter “the alleged victim”) was sentenced to the death penalty. The petitioners submitted the information in the context of Case 12.402, concerning application of the death penalty on Ronald Ernesto Raxcacó Reyes and requested Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes to be included as a victim. Because at the time of this request, the Commission had already issued a ruling on admissibility in Case 12.402, it decided to process the information pertaining to Mr. Ruiz Fuentes as a separate case. 2. The petitioners argued that several due process violations were committed during the criminal case culminating in the death sentence of the alleged victim. They further contended that the alleged victim endured acts of torture during his time in custody. Lastly, they claimed that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes was extrajudicially executed, after escaping from jail in 2005. 3. The State of Guatemala (hereinafter “the Guatemalan State,” “the State” or “Guatemala”) argued that due process rights were respected during the criminal proceedings against the alleged victim. Guatemala denied that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes had been tortured and asserted that the injuries endured by him were caused by a fall he sustained when attempting to escape at the time of his arrest. As for the alleged extrajudicial execution, it contended that it is investigating what took place with due diligence. 4. The Commission concludes that the State of Guatemala is responsible for violation of the rights to life, humane treatment, a fair trial and judicial protection, as established in Articles 4.1, 4.2, 4.6, 5.1, 5.2, 8.1, 8.2 c), f), g), h) and 25.1 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) in connection with the obligations set forth in Articles 1.1 and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes. The Commission also concludes that the State of Guatemala is responsible for violation of the right to humane treatment, a fair trial and judicial protection, as provided for in Articles 5.1, 8.1 and 25.1 of the American Convention in connection with the obligations set forth in Article 1.1 of the same instrument, to the detriment of the next of kin of Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes.