LIBERTY OF THE PERSON, HABEAS CORPUS AND RECURSO DE
1. Under the uncertain legal situation stemming from the indefinite period of the sate of siege in Paraguay, a number of individuals have been detained for no apparent motive and have been held in prison or have been unjustifiably detained for lengthy periods of time.
2. Concerned with the constant repetition of occurrences of this kind, which tend to become a common practice in various regions of the hemisphere, the Commission has taken a stand against such practices on a number of occasions. Specifically, it made the following reference to this point in its Annual Report for 1974:
Commission has given particular attention to the apparently exaggerated
use that is being made in some of our of our republics of the
constitutional power granted to the Executive Branch –generally under
supervision of Congress—to imprison, remove or expatriate persons on
grounds of political security, in exceptional situations. It is striking
to find that, by these means, men and women have been deprived of
their liberty for many months without the slightest charge having
been formulated against them and without their having been brought to
trial. With respect to these persons, at least in some of the
countries they are not entitled to request the assistance of an attorney
nor is the possibility recognized that, in their behalf, a writ of habeas
corpus can be successfully introduced.
3. Cases of lengthy periods of detention, incommunicado and without trial, have also been frequently denounced to the Commission, together with cases of arrest without concrete charges and without due process. The Commission has already stated its position on the practice of holding persons incommunicado, unnecessary in most cases, and which makes the arbitrary detention crueler. In this Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, for example, the Commission said the following in this regard:
detention incommunicado is, moreover, an encouragement to other crimes,
particularly that of torture. For if the Officials in charge of
detention facilitate need not produce the detainee in a short time, they
may with impunity employ brutal means, whether for purposes of
interrogation or intimidation. The detention can be prolonged until the
signs of torture have disappeared or, if the detainee is permanently
injured, he or she may be liquidated and the very fact of detention
4. According to figures from a number of sources, the number of individuals deprived of freedom in Paraguay between 1970 and 1977 without any concrete charge having been filed against them, if from 300 to 500.
5. In the last four years, the Commission has adopted eight resolutions whereby it has presumed the confirmation of 170 cases of arbitrary detention in Paraguay. Of these individuals, five were held under detention since 1958, three since 1959, one since 1960, one since 1961, one since 1962, one since 1963, six since 1964, eleven since 1965, five since 1966, two since 1967, six since 1968, three since 1969 and thirteen since 1970.
6. Using information from various sources, the Commission has also been able to draw up a list of individuals who, according to the claimants, have spent more than five years under detention in prison for political reasons.
The list reads as follows:
19 years (since 1959) Ananías Maidana Palacios
16 years (since 1962) Napoleón Ortigoza
years (since 1963)
Vicente Duarte Mareco
years (since 1964)
Severo Acosta Aranda
years (since 1965)
Emilio Barreto Dávalos
years (since 1968)
Almada de Gimenez
Felipe Vera Baez
María Lina Rodas
Alfonso Silva Quintana
8 years (since 1970) Herminio Stumft Arévalo
Total: 17 individuals
7. The Commission has obtained a number of lists, published by the Ministry of Interior of Paraguay, of political prisoners being held in Emboscada Prison and other jails. Adding to the names that appear on those lists and to those of individuals being held in the Third Precinct and omitting the individuals since released, the following list of 219 persons has been drawn up:
ABENTE BRUN, Diego
ACOSTA ARANDA, Severo
ACOSTA GOMEZ, Dimas
ACOSTA Vda. De GONZALEZ, Petrona de Jesús
ALEGRE PORTILLO, Alberto
ALFONSO RAMIREZ, Bonifacio
ALMADA de GIMENEZ, María Saturnina
ALONSO MASARE, Melquíades Albino
ALVAREZ RAMIREZ, Bonifacio
AMARILLA PEREIRA, Justo Eduardo
ARCE AVILA, Migdonio
ARCE SCHAERER, Eduardo
AYALA GONZALEZ, René
AYALA GIMENEZ, Víctor Manuel
BAEZ BRITEZ, Pablo
BALBUENA, Juan Marcelo
BAREIRO RODAS, Fulgencio
BARRETO DAVALOS, Emilio
BENITEZ FERREIRA, Miguel
BENITEZ GALEANO, Pedro
BENITEZ GONZALEZ, Eladio
BENITEZ LEGUIZAMON, Lázaro
BENITEZ MAIDANA, Eulogio
BENITEZ PAEZ, Rafael
BENITEZ VILLALBA, Silverio
BLANCO, Juvencio Veridio
BOGADO GONDRA, Juan Félix
BOGADO TABAGMAN, Eduardo
BOGARIN, Prudencio Vidal
BOYD JARA, Marcos Aníbal
BRAÑAS GADEA, Carlos Guillermo
BRITOS FERREIRA, Marcial
BUSTOS COLMAN, Julio
CABRERA BENITEZ, Crescencio
CABRERA MAIZ, Esteban
CABRERA de LOPEZ, Vicenta
CAMPOS RUIZ, Daniel
CANESSE, Jorge Humberto
CARDOZO BRIZUELA, Macario
CARDOZO GIMENEZ, Bernardo
CARDOZO RODAS, Carlos Amado
CASCO SPEZZINNI, Carlos Ernesto
CERDAN de RODRIGUEZ, María Ester
CESPEDEZ FERNANDEZ, Silverio
COLMAN PINTOS, Julio César
COLMAN NUÑEZ, Emigdio
CORONEL CABALLERO, Andrés Eliodoro
CORONEL CANO, Hilarión
CORONEL ZORRILLA, Corcino
CORONEL ZORRILLA, Eugolio Constantino
DELGADO CONTI, Teodoro Victoriano
DUARTE MARECA, Vicente
DUARTE SEGOVIA, Hipólito Ramón
ESPINOLA, José Sisinio Alén
ESPINOZA QUIROGA, Pedro Sergio
ESTIGARRIBIA VELASQUEZ, Carlos
FALCON ESCOBAR, Eulogia
FALCON ESCOBAR, Vicente
FARINA INSFRAN, Gladis María Beatriz
FERNANDEZ, Juan Antenor
FERNANDEZ LLANO, Emigdio
FERNANDEZ, Silvio Ramón
FLEITAS RIOS, Sixto
FLORENTIN DUARTE, Andrés
FONTCLARA BAEZ, Carlos
FRANCO, Lydia Ester Cabrera M. de
FRETES MAIDANA, Pedro
FUNES FERNANDEZ, Erasmo
FUNES FERNANDEZ Mariano
GALEANO ROTELA, María Magdalena
GAONA de ACOSTA, Anastacia Idalina
GIMENEZ LOPEZ, Angel
GOMEZ GALEANO, Victoriana
GONZALEZ BAEZ, José Tomás
GONZALEZ BALCARCE, Alberto
GONZALEZ GONZALEZ, Justianiano
GONZALEZ OCAMPOS, Eulogio
GONZALEZ, Petrona de
IBARRA DE LA CRUZ, Regino
JARA LOPEZ, Dionisio Abel
KAN MUN, Hwa
107. KING, Kon-Gu
108. KING de, Monica
KYU KIN, Biun
LEQUIZAMON ZORRILLA, Juan
LOPEZ BRITEZ, Pastor
LOPEZ ESTIGARRIBIA, Jacinto
LOPEZ ESTIGARRIBIA, Juan Carlos
LOPEZ ESTIGARRIBIA, Laurentino
LOPEZ ESTIGARRIBIA, Luis
LOPEZ ESTIGARRIBIA, Pedro
LOPEZ PERITO, Miguel Angel Ignaio
LOPEZ ZACARIAS, Porfirio
LOPEZ, Vicenta Cabrera de
LLORES, INZAURRALDE, Arnoldo Teodoro
MAIDANA PALACIOS, Ananías
MAIDANA SOSA, Santiago
MARTINEZ BRITOS, Anastacio
MARTINEZ CANTERO, Roberto
MARTINEZ de VELAZCO, Claudelina
MARTINEZ IRALA, José del Rosario
MARTINEZ, José del Carmen
MARTINEZ MOREL, Víctor
MENDIETA PEREZ, Constancia
MOREL MARTINEZ, Salomón
MORINIGO, José Nicolás
MORINIGO PAREDEZ, Bernardo
MORINIGO PEDROZO, Leopoldo
OBELAR, Juan Leonor
OJEDA FELCAN, José Gill
OLMEDO MONTANIA, José María
ORTIGOZA MAIDANA, Milciades
OSORIO COLMAN, Epifanio
OSORIO PEREZ, Epifanio
OSORIO PEREZ, Eugenio
OSORIO PEREZ, María Eustacia
OTEIZA, Carlos Alberto
OVANDO, Escolástico Guillermo
OVIEDO DUARTE, Amílcar María
PAREDES MARTINEZ, Edmundo
PENAYO VALLEJOS, Bernabé
PEÑA CASCO, Ramón
PIETRAFESA CRECO, Pablo Julián
PORTILLO, Fermín Taurín Francisco
PORTILLO SERVIN, Gerónimo
RAMIREZ BLANCO, Carlos o Rodolfo Feliciano
RAMIREZ FERNANDEZ, Celsa
RAMIREZ SANCHEZ, Calixto
RAMIREZ VILLALBA, Benjamín de Jesús
RAMIREZ VILLALBA, Rodolfo
RIVAK, Juan Mariano
RIVEROS SILVA, Máximo
RODAS, María Lina
RODRIGUEZ, Campuzano Oscar
RODRIGUEZ GONZALEZ, Humberto Fulvio
RODRIGUEZ, María Esther de
RODRIGUEZ, Petrona Regalada
ROODRIGUEZ, Simón Mario
ROJAS CACERES, Aurelio Neonicio
ROJAS, Constancia Mendienta de
ROLON CENTURION, Domingo
ROLON CENTURION, Melchor
ROLON CENTURION, Santiago
RUIZ BALBUENA, Julián
RUIZ DIAZ, Rodrigo Salomón
SALABERRY, Carlos José
SALAZAR VILLAGRA, Juan Manuel
SALDIVAR CARDOZO, Juliana
SANABRIA IREPA, Miguel Angel
SANCHEZ GARCIA, Juan Miguel
SILVA QUINTANA; Alfonso
SILVA, Saturnina de
SOLER, Juana Samudio de
SPIRIDONOFF BARRESI, Nicolás
STUMPS AREVALOS, Herminio
VALENZUELA CANDIA, Antonio
VARGAS ARANDA, Susana
VARGAS FERREIRA, Aquilino
VELAZCO, Claudelina de
VERA BAEZ, Cástulo
VERA BAEZ, Felipe
VERA GONZALEZ, Sotero
217. VERA MORINIGO, Ignacia
218. VERDUN, Feliciano
219. VILLALBA, Antolina Amalia
8. The Commission has noted with singular concern the repeated denunciations involving the number of pregnant women who have been detained and have given birth in prison, as well as women detained with small children. Of the approximately 18 babies born in these circumstances, two have spent two years in jail together with their mothers.
9. On March 29, 1977, the Commission requested of the Government of Paraguay a copy of some of the most recent decrees issued by the Executive Branch ordering detentions in exercise of the special powers of the state of siege. This communication, like many others, went unanswered.
10. Almost all of the denunciations on detentions received by the Commission indicate that the detentions are, as a general rule, conducted late at night by officials who neither wear uniforms nor present any identifications or written order whatever, who generally use violence and refuse to specify the reason for the arrest or the place where the individual apprehended is to be held.
11. The Commission received information from a number of sources on the transfer in mid-September 1976 of political prisoners to a former correctional institution for minor in Emboscada. We do not know the precise number of individuals who were taken to Emboscada but, according to lists and other information received by the Commission, the number may be as high as 360, including men, women and children (some 14 infants). According to the information received, the conditions in the new quarters represent a marked improvement over those found in police stations where political prisoners had always been held. The Emboscada prison, according to knowledgeable sources, is a healthier environment; visits are allowed and there are no rooms for torture. Nevertheless, we should point out that we have also received communications denouncing serious problems in Emboscada, such as overcrowding, lack of potable water and adequate food, and inadequately ventilated cells. Furthermore, we cannot fail to mention the denunciations expressing deep concern and alarm over the appointment as Director of the Prison of Colonel José F. Grau, to whom serious crimes have been imputed. We have also received information from a number of sources indicating the possibility that political prisoners are still being held in a concentration camp know as Peña Hermosa, located on the Río Paraguay.
12. The Commission feels it important to point out that, according to information received, during 1976 and 1977 the Government of Paraguay opened proceedings against a certain number of individuals who have been deprived of their freedom for some time now, under the special powers granted by the state of siege. The Commission has received with prudent optimism this news, which would seem to indicate that the Government of Paraguay recognizes the duty to bring before the competent courts, those individuals suspected of participating in acts that threaten the security of the State.
TO CHAPTER III
A communication of April 10, 1972, denounced that:
judicial decision of October 10, 1961, Luis F. Garbarino, judge of the
city of Asunción, ordered the release of Paraguayan Professor Antonio
that decision, the above-mentioned professor continues to be detained in
the Third Police Station of Asuncion;
The same communication claims that Mr. Silvano Morinigo Gaona, a Paraguayan Citizen, who accused of plotting to kill the President of the Republic, General Alfredo Stroessner, has been detained for six years without trial;
The Commission, in a note of April 19, 1972, requested information from the Government of Paraguay, pursuant to Articles 42 and 44 of the Regulations, and by letter of April 20 of the same year, informed the claimant of the steps taken with respect to the complaint;
Article 51,1 of the Regulations reads as follows:
occurrence of the events on which information has been requested will be
presumed to be confirmed if the government referred to has not supplied
such information within 180 days of the request, provided always, that
the invalidity of the events denounced is not shown by other elements of
In view of the time that has transpired without the Government of Paraguay having furnished the information requested to the Commission,
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGTHS
1. To consider the occurrence of the events denounced in the communication of April 10, 1972 to be confirmed, through the application of Article 51,1 of the Regulations.
2. To request the Government of Paraguay to order the release of Antonio Maidana, inasmuch as he was ordered to be released from detention by Judge Luis F. Garbarino on October 10. 1961.
3. To request the Government of Paraguay to inform the Commission of the measures it has taken, or in the event that it released Professor Maidana prior to this resolution, that it notify the Commission of the circumstances thereof, and to request that this information be sent so that these reports may be considered at its next session.
In its observations on the Report of the Commission, the Government of Paraguay stated the following with regard to this case:
Maidana was detained on August 10, 1958. Antonio Maidana, Julio Rojas
and Alfredo Alcorta were together the principal founders of the
communist Party which 11 years ago provoked the bloody Civil War that
ravaged Paraguay. In 1958, they clandestinely plotted a massive
workers’ strike and instigated a military uprising that caused a
crisis that year and was about to claim new victims to add to the
already lengthy list of individuals who died in Paraguay in fratricidal
conflicts. Second Secretary General of the proscribed Paraguayan
Communist Party, decorated ‘in absentia’ by the Government of the
Soviet Union, until that time Antonio Maidana has devoted all his
energies to impairing the political, social and economic development of
the country so as to gain advantage thereby for an insignificant
minority. On January 27, 1977, he was released together with Alfredo
Alcorta and Julio Rojas, who were engaged in the same line of criminal
Government provided these three individuals all the guarantees and
prepared passports for them when they expressed a desire to travel
abroad. At present, continuing their policy of creating incidents, that
three gained entry into the Embassy of Peru thereby creating a situation
‘sui generis’ inasmuch as the Government is not persecuting them.
There is nothing to prevent them from traveling anywhere they wish at
any time, and the necessary arrangements are being made with the Embassy
CASES 1758, 1759, 1762 and 1763
The arbitrary arrest of Professor Julio Rojas was denounced by a communication dated July 8, 1972, supplemented by one dated February 27, 1973, and by a communication dated December 19, 1972, supplemented by one dated February 7, 1973; according to the denunciations, Professor Rojas has for political reasons, been held prisoner in Paraguay since 1958 under deplorable conditions, without having been tried or serving a sentence;
In a communication dated December 27, 1972, the following denunciations were made: a) that Mr. Ignacio Chamorro has been under arrest in Paraguay since December 1959, supposedly for subversive activities, and has not been tried; and b) that Miss Idolina Anastasia Gaona has been under arrest in that country since July 1965, without having been tried or knowing the reasons for her arrest;
By communication dated January 16, 1973, a denunciation was made to the effect that 87 persons (whose names are listed and include those of Professor Rojas, Mr. Chamorro and Miss Gaona) have been imprisoned without trial in Paraguay, for political reasons. According to the denunciation, five of these persons have been imprisoned since 1958, three since 1959, one since 1960, one since 1961, one since 1962, one since 1963, six since 1964, eleven since 1965, five since 1966, two since 1967, six since 1968, three since 1969 and thirteen since 1970. The denunciation indicates the places of imprisonment:
In a cable dated February 1, 1973, the denunciation was made that Mr. Aníbal Florentín Peña, after suffering barbaric torture and serving two years in prison, was in danger of death because of a prolonged hunger strike;
In a cable dated February 1, 1973, concerning the situation of Mr. Peña, and by a note dated February 16, 1973, regarding the other cases mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs of this preamble, the Commission requested the Paraguayan government to provide the appropriate information (Art. 42 of the Regulations);
At its 30th session (April 1973), in view of the seriousness of the acts denounced and the prompt action required by the circumstances, the Commission decided to request the Paraguayan government once again that it provide information previously requested within a period not to exceed 60 days. This decision was transmitted to the Government of Paraguay by note date June 15, 1973;
The Paraguayan government’s only reply to the Commission, dated July 6, 1973, was that it had “taken the pertinent action” on the note of June 15 and its appendices and had “referred them to the competent national agency”;
Article 51,1 of the Regulations of the Commission provides as follows:
occurrence of the events on which information has been requested will be
presumed to be confirmed if the government referred to has not supplied
such information within 180 days of the request, provides always, that
the invalidity of the events denounced is not shown by other elements of
In view of the time that has elapsed, during which the Paraguayan government has not furnished the Commission with the information it requested,
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
1. To apply Article 51,1 of the Regulations and presume the occurrence of the events indicated in the preamble of this resolution to be confirmed.
2. To recommend to the Government of Paraguay that the persons mentioned be immediately freed.
3. To call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that these acts constitute very serious violations of the right to liberty and personal security, the right of protection from arbitrary arrest, the right to a fair trial and the right to due process of law, set forth in Articles I, XXV, XVIII and XXVI of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man.
4. To include this resolution in its Annual Report to the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (Art. 9 (bis), c. iii of the Statute).
With regard to these cases, the Government reported the following in its observations of 7 August 1977:
case of Julio Rojas is directly related to the preceding case.
Chamorro was detained on December 31, 1959, after a savage assault
perpetrated by a band of marauders of which he was a member, which
attacked all other quiet community of Coronel Bogado in the early
morning hours, causing the death of a number of police officers and
citizens from that community, which is near the Argentine border.
Idalina Gaona de Acosta, also known as ‘Comrade Alicia’. A
leader of the Paraguayan Communist Party and the High Command’s chief
expert in liaison with all other organizations of that proscribed group.
She is an active participant in the guerrilla activities conducted by
the so-called “Mcal. Lopez Column” and is responsible for the death
of Official Inspector Asunción Mustafá Abdala. She also served as an
aide to Arturo López, alias Commander Agapito Valiente, a sinister
assassin who for a number of years ravaged the Paraguayan countryside.
Florentín Peña, principal collaborator of Agustín Giburú, an
agitator and mastermind of the first skyjacking, committed many years
before it become fashionable. He was released on May 29, 1973.
1. On May 29, 1975 this Commission resolved to recommend to the Government of Paraguay that it take the necessary measures so that the basic rights of Captain Napoleón Ortigoza be fully and immediately reestablished.
2. According to the allegations –presumed to be confirmed by application of Article 51,1 of the Regulations—Captain Ortigoza has been detained since 1962 in the Central Police Prison of Asunción without ever having been brought to trial;
3. The recommendation mentioned in the first clause of this resolution was made known to the Government of Paraguay by note of August 8, 1975, addressed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, a copy of which was sent to the Acting Representative of Paraguay to the Organization of American States on August 18, 1975;
4. Notwithstanding the terms of the recommendation and the time that has transpired since it was communicated to the Government, there is no record that the Government of Paraguay has complied with that recommendation;
5. For this reason, the provision of Article 57, 1 of the Regulations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights should be applied.
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
1. To call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that the acts denounced constitute a serious violations of Article XXV of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and,
2. To include this resolution, together with an account of the case, in the Annual Report that the Commission presents to the General Assembly of the Organization, in accordance with Article 9 (bis) c if its Statute.
In its observations, the Government of Paraguay states the following:
December 1962 Captain Napoleón Ortigoza, together with Guillermo Ovando
and others, perpetrated a military coup which, when discovered by Cadet
Alberto Anastacio Benítez, culminated in the cruel murder of Benítez.
Both have been tried and sentenced by the Military Court of First
Instance and the case is now before the Military Court of Appeals.
A denunciation dated October 31, 1975 alleged that Bienvenido Argüello and Alberto Alegre, Paraguayan citizens, were being held in the Asunción Jail, after having been kidnapped by Paraguayan Officials in the town of Clorinda, Formosa Province, Republic of Argentina.
According to the denunciation, the kidnapping took place on May 12, 1975 and the two individuals were taken to the police station in the border town of Falcón, where they were tortured.
The denunciation also makes reference to the status of Paraguayan citizens Julio César Colman, Luis Cano, Pablo Brítez Báez, Hilario Villalba, Hugo Godoy Mernes, Víctor Salinas, Rodolfo Heinrich, Miguel Arnaldo Fleitas and Nélida Paredes, who, it is claimed, were also being held arbitrarily in Paraguayan jails.
In a note dated December 12, 1972 the Commission transmitted to the Government of Paraguay, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the pertinent parts of the denunciation and requested that it provide information on the allegations as well as any other data that would enable the Commission to determine whether the domestic legal remedies had been exhausted. A copy of that communication was sent that same day to the Permanent Representative of Paraguay to the Organization of American States.
Despite the time elapsed since that request, the Government of Paraguay has not provided any information, even though the period established in Article 51,1 of the Regulations has passed.
On the 12th of this month the 180-day period elapsed, after which, according to Article 51 of its Regulations, the Commission can, in the event that the Government of Paraguay fails to respond, presume the occurrence of the events denounced, as long as there is no evidence to the effect that the denunciation is unfounded.
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSIONON HUMAN RIGHTS
1. In application of Article 51,1 of the Regulations, to presume as confirmed the occurrence of the events denounced.
2. To call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that these acts constitute a serious violation of the right to liberty and personal security (Article I of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man) and to recommend that the Government adopt the necessary measures to see to it that the individuals named in the denunciation regain their freedom immediately and that those responsible be penalized in accordance with Paraguayan Law, and that these measures be reported to this Commission within a maximum period of 60 days;
3. To transmit this resolution to the Government of Paraguay and to the claimants.
With regard of this case, in its observations the Government of Paraguay reported on the situation of the eleven individuals cited as follows:
Alegre was detained in May 1975 for engaging in criminal activities in
the so-called MOPOCO (Movimiento Popular Colorado), a small group of
Marxists who conduct their activities in border areas. There is
unequivocal proof of the fact that the members of the “Movimiento
Popular Colorado” have made trips to Cuba and other Communist
countries on repeated occasions. The other individuals mentioned in this
case were never detained in Paraguay but were detained in the Republic
of Argentina on the occasion of a Marxist meeting held in the city of
Buenos Aires; thus it would be difficult to impute any form of physical
mistreatment to the Paraguayan police, as they never had contact with
those persons. Alegre is being held in Emboscada Prison, not
Summarized below are four Resolutions adopted by the Commission during its 41st session (May 1977), which are now being processed; the occurrence of the acts denounced were presumed to be confirmed in application of the Article 51,1 of the Regulations, in light of the Government’s silence:
i. In a number of communications, the first of which is dated December 17, 1975, it was denounced to this Commission that Professor Miguel Chase Sardí, Victorio Suárez, Mauricio Schwartzman, a sociologist and Marilyn Rehnfelt –all from the Marandú project—as well as Gloria Estragó, an employee of the Indian Bureau of Paraguay, had been detained at the beginning of December;
ii. According to the claimants, Marilyn Rehnfeldt was detained for a number of days and Professor Chase Sardí for 7 months, without any charges being brought against them;
iii. It was also alleged that Gloria Estragó was deprived of her freedom for approximately one year before charges were brought against her;
iv. According to the claimant, Miguel Chase Sardí, Victorio Suárez and Gloria Estragó were brutally tortured; Chase Sardí suffered a number of fractured ribs, which made it difficult for him to move his arms, and an ear infection; but did not receive the necessary medical attention;
v. Mr. Suárez and Mr. Schwartzman allegedly remained under detention without charges having been brought against them;
vi. In notes dated February 10 and June 2, 1976, the IACHR transmitted to the Government of Paraguay the pertinent parts of the denunciation and requested that it provide the corresponding information (Article 42 of the Regulations), but no reply has been received;
vii. As a consequence, the Commission decided to call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that these acts constitute very serious violations of the right to liberty and personal security (Article I of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man); of the right to a fair trial (Article XVIII); of the right of association (Article XXII); of the right of protection from arbitrary arrest (Article XXV), and of the right to due process of law (Article XXVI).
With regard to this case involving the detention of the leaders of the Marandú Project and the denunciation of torture of some of these individuals, the Government of Paraguay stated the following in its observations on this Report:
Miguel Chase Sardí, Victorio Villalba Suárez, Mauricio Schwartman (sic), Marilyn Rhenfeldt y Gloria Estragó, all of whom are linked to Communist infiltrations in the Marandú Project. All now enjoy complete freedom, with the exception of Estragó who is being held under house arrest for reasons of health. She had journeyed to the Soviet Union to receive instructions in order to carry out her objective. Miguel Chase Sardí, alias Comrade Gato, a well-known Communist agitator in university and literary circles, was apprehended in 1947 during the Civil War while a combat group, and has been the chief leader of this movement.
i. A communication dated March 10, 1976 denounced the detention of 53 individuals –whose names are listed—and further denounced that a number of them had disappeared;
ii. According to the denunciation, this list included only part of the approximately 200 individuals who were detained in Paraguay during November and December 1975;
iii. The claimant reported that a number of residences were broken into and some private property was confiscated;
iv. According to the claimant, in some instances, if the individual sought was not found, either the spouse or some other members of the family were detained, that no charges have been brought against the individuals detained;
v. The denunciation alleges various cases of torture involving women, the sick and the elderly, and that the authorities have not informed the members of their families of the whereabouts or the prison where the individuals detained are to be found;
vi. In a note dated March 29, 1976, the Commission transmitted to the Government of Paraguay the pertinent parts of the denunciation and requested that it provide the corresponding information (Article 42 of the Regulation), but no reply has been received;
vii. Therefore, the Commission decided to call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that these acts constitute very serious violations of the right to liberty, personal security and integrity (Article I of the Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man); of the right to protection of the family (Article VI); of the right to the inviolability of the home (Article IX); of the right to a fair trial (Article XVIII); of the right to protection from arbitrary arrest (Article XXV), and of the right to due process of law (Article XXVI)
In its observations of August 7, 1977, the Government of Paraguay reported the following on the case in question:
of the individuals named in this case were detained and later released,
thus making this similar to the previous case. The charges that they
have disappeared are false.
i. A communication dated March 1, 1976 denounced to this Commission a number of deaths, disappearances, illegal detentions and torture, especially of women;
ii. According to the claimant, Oílda Recalde, the mother of four children, has spent nine years in prison; Gilberta Verú, 65 years of age, who spent “almost 10 years in prison for having attempted to defend her husband who was decapitated in her presence,” has again been arrested and is being held incommunicado in the Department of Investigations; Agripina Portillo has spent more than one year incommunicado in the Investigations Department; Teresa Asilvera entered “prison with a two-year-old child and left prison when the child was six years old, and throughout this period her child was subjected to the same treatment as that given adult prisoners;” Rosa Goiburú “was arrested in an advanced stage of pregnancy, had her child in jail, alone, and before leaving spent approximately three years there with her small child; Gladys de Mancuello, “arrested in 1974 very late in her pregnancy, had her child in prison and is still there with her child;” María Candelaria Ramírez “lost her unborn child under torture, did not receive medical attention, and was released only when she was near death;”
iii. Allegedly, no charges have been brought against any of these individuals;
iv. In a note date April 29, 1976, the Commission transmitted to the Government of Paraguay the permanent parts of the denunciation and requested that it provide the corresponding information (Article 42 of the Regulations); in a note dated February 4, 1977, the Commission repeated its request for information, extending the deadline for a response by 90 days, but no reply has been received;
v. Therefore, the ICHAR decided to call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that these acts constitute very serious violations of the right to liberty and personal security and integrity (Article I of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man); of the right of protection of the family (Article VI); of the right to protection for mother and children (Article VII); of the right to preservation of health and well being (Article XI); of the right to a fair trial (Article XVIII); of the right to protection from arbitrary arrest (Article XXV), and of the right to due process of law (Article XXVI).
The Government stated the following in connection with this case:
Verdún de Talavera, a terrorist arrested while serving as a nurse among
the armed hordes who invaded the country in 1960 under the label of
“guerrillas”. She was released on July 1, 1968. In 1974 she was
again detained on suspicion of having been involved in the criminal
attack to which reference was made, and was again released.
the individuals mentioned in this case have already been released. One
of them, Rosa Mujica Goiburú, was the chief organizer of the escape of
a number of criminals who were being held in the Seventh Precinct. With
respect to the alleged mistreatment and the unhealthy conditions,
regarding that lie, reports can be obtained at the International Red
Cross, which conducts periodic visits to the penitentiaries in Paraguay
and other countries.
i. A communication dated June 7, 1976 denounced the detention of Mrs. Aída Angélica Ortiz in Asunción, together with her 11 month-old baby girl, Aída Alejandra, around Mid-March of 1976;
ii. According to the denunciation, Mrs. Ortiz is being held incommunicado under subhuman conditions and the whereabouts and fate of her child are unknown.
iii. According to the claimant, at the time of her detention, Mrs. Ortiz was under strict medical care for chronic asthma, a cardiac condition, and nervous system and liver problems; thus, according to the claimant, her life was in jeopardy;
iv. By cable dated August 12, 1976, the Commission transmitted to the Government of Paraguay the pertinent parts of the denunciation and requested that it provide the corresponding information (Article 42 of the Regulations); by cable dated November 5, 1976, the Commission repeated its request for information to the Government of Paraguay, but no reply has been received;
v. Consequently, the Commission decided to call the attention of the Government of Paraguay to the fact that these acts constitute very serious violations of the right to liberty and personal security and integrity (Article I of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man); of the right to protection of the family (Article VI); of the right to protection of children (Article VII); of the right to a fair trial (Article XVIII); of the right to protection from arbitrary arrest (Article XXV) and of the right to due process of law (Article XXVI).
Finally, with regard to the situation of Aída Angélica Ortiz and her child, the Government of Paraguay limited itself to the following remarks:
The same remarks may be made in connection with Case 2076 (as those made in reference to Case 2029).
American Convention on Human Rights
Every person has the right to personal liberty and security.
No one shall be deprived of his physical liberty except for the
reason and under the conditions established beforehand by the
constitution of the State Party concerned or by a law established
No one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest or imprisonment.
Anyone who is detained shall be informed of the reasons for his
detention and shall be promptly notified of the charge or charges
Any person detained shall be brought promptly before a judge or
other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and shall
be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to be released
without prejudice to the continuation of the proceedings. His
release may be subject to guarantees to assure his appearance for
Anyone who is deprived of his liberty shall be entitled to recourse
to a competent court, in order that the court may decide without
delay on the lawfulness
of his arrest or detention and order his release if the arrest or
detention is unlawful. In States Parties whose laws provide that
anyone who believes himself to be threatened with deprivation of his
liberty is entitled to recourse to a competent court in
order that it may decide on the lawfulness of such treat, this
remedy may not be restricted or abolished. The interested party or
another person in his behalf is entitled to seek these remedies.
No one shall be detained for debt. This principle shall not limit
the orders of a competent judicial authority issued for
nonfulfillment of duties of support.
Annual Report for 1974 of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights to the General Assembly. OEA/Ser.P/AG/doc.520/75, 31 March
1975, pp. 35 36.
OEA/Ser.L/V/II.40, doc.10, 11 February 1977, p. 44
See the Appendix to this chapter.
The Commission later received information
effects that some of these individuals had been released. Among
these, mention should be made of Antoliano Cardozo and Ignacio
Chamorro who were held for 19 years without any charge ever having
been brought against
to the denunciation received by the Commission (See page 45).
In this report the expression “political prisoners” is used to
refer to individuals detained under an accusation of an infraction
of the internal laws on the Security of the State and other similar
However, it should be noted that, according to information received
by the Commission, approximately one thousand relatives of political
prisoners being held in Emboscada spent approximately 12 hours
outside the prison on December 25, 1976, without being allowed to
see the prisoners.
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.30, doc. 40, rev.1, 27 April 1973.
 It is worth noting that while the Commission received
with satisfaction the news that the Government of Paraguay had
released Antonio Maidana on January 27, 1977, along with Julio Rojas
(see case 1758) and Alfredo Alcorta, it must mention the fact that Mr. Maidana was
deprived of his freedom for more than 15 years after a judicial
decision ordering his release had been handed down. According to
information received by the Commission, Mr. Maidana, Mr. Rojas and
Mr. Alcorta, after spending a number of weeks under house arrest, sought political
asylum in an embassy in Asunción. After spending a number of months
in asylum, the Government of Paraguay finally granted them
safe-conducts and they left the country.
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.31, doc. 42, rev.1, 23 October 1973.
 Mr. Julio Rojas was held under detention for 18 years,
without ever being persecuted. See our note at the bottom of page
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.36, doc. 29, rev.1, 16 October 1975.
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.38, doc. 20, 2 June 1976.
 It is pertinent to point out that this Resolution was
published in its entirety in Asunción, in the newspaper El Radical
(an official organ of the Radical Liberal Party), during the second
week of January 1977. It was accompanied by the following editorial
note: “Thanks to the intervention of the Commission, sometime
later the students Luis Cano, Hilario Villalba, Hugo Godoy Mermes, Víctor
Salinas, Rodolfo Heinrich, Miguel Arnoldo Fleitas and Nélida
Paredes were released from Paraguayan jails, according to unofficial
information received by us. Of the prisoners mentioned in the
Commission’s Resolution, it would seem that Julio César Colman
and Pablo Brítez Báez are still being held prisoner, their
whereabouts unknown. It would appear that the citizens kidnapped in
the city of Clorinda, also cited in the Resolution adopted by the
IACHR, Bienvenido Argüello and Alberto Alegre, are
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.41, doc.10, 13 May 1977.
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.41, doc.8, 12 May 1977.
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.41, doc.9, 12 May 1977.
 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.41, doc.11, 13 May 1977. This
Resolution is being processed in accordance with Articles 56 and 57
the Regulations of the Commission.