REPORT No. 56/09
DECISION TO ARCHIVE
March 27, 2009
ALLEGED VICTIM: Carmen Dueñas Gómez et al.
PETITIONER: Fernando de Pierola
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS: Articles 24 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, taken in concordance with Article 1(1) of that international instrument
DATE OF INITIAL PROCESSING: August, 20 1996
I. POSITION OF THE PETITIONER
complaint regards the 1993 privatization of the Peruvian Telephone Company
(CPT). According to the petitioner, at the
petitioner contends that in view of this situation, the workers formed
twelve groups and filed the same number of
II. POSITION OF THE STATE
its first communication, the State asked the Commission for the names of
all the alleged victims. In its second communication, the State alleged
that the domestic remedies had not been exhausted, and, therefore,
proceedings on the
III. PROCESSING BEFORE THE COMMISSION
4. The initial petition, dated July 8, 1996, was transmitted to the Peruvian State on August 20, 1996, which was asked to provide its response within a period of three months. The State’s response was received on December 17, 1996, and transmitted to the petitioner on March 4, 1997, which was asked to submit any pertinent observations within a period of 45 days. On June 25, 1997, the petitioner submitted its response. On July 8, 1997, the petitioner submitted additional information. On the basis of this information, the Commission assigned the petition case No. 11.795. On August 25, 1997, this communication was transmitted to the State, which was asked to submit its response within a period of three months. On October 28, 1997, the State asked the Commission to provide it with the names of the persons included in the petition, with a view to carrying out the pertinent investigation. On November 6, 1997, the Commission asked the petitioner to provide it with the names of the other persons included in the case other than Ms. Carmen Dueñas Gómez. On December 2, 1997, a note was received from the State asking that the petition be declared inadmissible. This communication was transmitted to the petitioner on December 11, 1997, which was asked to submit its observations within a period of one month.
IV. GROUNDS FOR THE DECISION TO ARCHIVE
Article 48(b) of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 30(6)
of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
establish that with regard to the processing of a petition, once the
observations have been received or the period
petition alleges violations of the rights enshrined in Articles 24 and 25
of the American Convention, owing to a collective dismissal on the part of
a privatized company. For its part, the State argued that the
7. Under these circumstances, there is not enough available information to make a determination as to whether the grounds underlying the initial petition subsist or the petition’s admissibility or inadmissibility. Consequently, in accordance with Article 48(b) of the Convention and Article 30(6) of IACHR Rules of Procedure, the Commission decides to archive the petition.
Done and signed in the city of Washington, D.C., on the 27th day of the month of March, 2009. (Signed): Luz Patricia Mejía Guerrero, President; Víctor E. Abramovich, First Vice-president; Felipe González, Second Vice-president; Sir Clare K. Roberts, Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Florentín Meléndez, and Paolo Carozza, members of the Commission.