| 
       REPORT
      Nº 22/01*            
      I.         
      SUMMARY           
      1         
      On February 18, 1997, the Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos
      Humanos (hereafter “CEDHU” or “the petitioner”) presented a
      petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter
      “the Commission” or “the IACHR”) against the Republic of Ecuador
      (hereinafter “the State”) in which it alleged violations of the
      following rights protected by the American Convention on Human Rights
      (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”): 
      the right to personal liberty (Article 7), the right to a fair
      trial (Article 8), and the right to judicial protection (Article 25), all
      in breach of the obligations set forth at Article 1(1), to the detriment
      of Mr. José Patricio Reascos.           
      2.         
      The parties arrived at a friendly settlement agreement in this case
      on June 11, 1999.  This report
      contains a brief description of the facts and the text of that agreement,
      in keeping with Article 49 of the Convention.           
      II.         
      THE FACTS           
      3.          At 8:00 a.m. of
      September 12, 1993, Mr. Reascos, who was inebriated, was detained in the
      San Roque sector of the city of Quito by members of the Office of Criminal
      Investigation.  When he was searched, a packet of marijuana was found that
      the petitioner had acquired for personal consumption.            
      4.         
      Mr. Reascos was taken to the offices of Interpol and later
      transferred to the Center for Provisional Detention. 
      The Third Criminal Court of Pachinko heard the case, and on October
      16, 1993, instituted criminal proceedings and, considering that the
      requirements of Article 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure[1] were satisfied, ordered that Mr. Reascos be held
      in pre-trial detention.           
      5.         
      The petitioner stated that at the moment the complaint was
      submitted to the IACHR on February 18, 1997, and despite the constant
      requests for a speedy trial, this had not happened, as more than three
      years had elapsed without a formal indictment.           
      6.         
      The petitioner reported that under Article 65 of the Law on
      Narcotic and Psycho tropic Substances of Ecuador, drug consumption should
      be sanctioned by a maximum of two years in prison, even if one is given
      the maximum penalty provided by law.[2]
      At the time the complaint was received at the IACHR, Mr. Reascos had
      already served more time than the maximum penalty that could have been
      imposed on him.  Accordingly,
      on November 4, 1996, he filed a writ of amparo
      with the President of the Superior Court of Justice of Quito, which was
      dismissed on November 6, 1996.           
      7.         
      The petitioner declared that the investigation in the case, which
      according to Article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should not last
      more than 60 days, was drawn out over three years.           
      8.         
      On June 4, 1997, the Third Criminal Court of Pachinko sentenced Mr.
      Reascos to 16 months of correctional prison for the crime of drug
      consumption, and ruled that the verdict should be consulted with the
      superior court.  At the time
      of this verdict, Mr. Reascos had been detained for three years and nine
      months. On September 16, 1997, the Superior Court affirmed the verdict of
      the court below, and so Mr. Reascos was released September 20, 1997,
      having been imprisoned for a total of four years. 
      Accordingly, his right to be tried within a reasonable time was
      violated, and likewise his right to be presumed innocent until proven
      otherwise.           
      III.         
      PROCESSING BEFORE THE COMMISSION           
      9.         
      On March 3, 1997, the Commission received the complaint, originally
      sent on February 18, 1997.  On
      July 28, 1997, it began the processing of this case and asked the
      Government of Ecuador to provide relevant information within 90 days. 
      On September 24, 1997, the petitioner sent additional information. 
      On September 30, 1997, Ecuador submitted its response to the IACHR
      with reports prepared by the National Police and the Superior Court of
      Quito.  On December 8, 1998,
      the IACHR made itself available to the petitioner and the State to pursue
      a friendly settlement.  On
      January 8, 1999, and February 1, 1999, respectively, the State and
      petitioner accepted. The friendly settlement agreement was signed in the
      presence of Carlos Ayala Corao, at the time a member of the IACHR and
      rapporteur for Ecuador, who traveled to Quito to facilitate the agreement. 
      The parties asked the Commission to ratify this agreement in its
      entirety and to supervise its implementation.           
      IV.         
      THE FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT           
      10.         
      The friendly settlement agreement signed by the parties states as
      follows:  I.
      BACKGROUND   The
      Ecuadorian State, through the Office of the Attorney General, with a view
      to promoting and protecting human rights and given the great importance of
      the full observance of human rights at this time for the international
      image of our country, as the foundation of a just, dignified, democratic,
      and representative society, has decided to take a new course in the
      evolution of human rights in Ecuador.   The
      Office of the Attorney General has initiated conversations with all
      persons who have been victims of human rights violations, aimed at
      reaching friendly settlement agreements to provide reparations for the
      damages caused.   The
      Ecuadorian State, in strict compliance with the obligations it acquired
      upon signing the American Convention on Human Rights and other
      international human rights law instruments, is aware that any violation of
      an international obligation that has caused damages triggers the duty to
      make adequate reparations--monetary reparations and criminal punishment of
      the perpetrators being the most just and equitable form. Therefore the
      Office of the Attorney General and Mr. José Patricio Reascos, acting on
      his own behalf, have reached a friendly settlement, pursuant to the
      provisions of Articles 48(1)(f) and 49 of the American Convention on Human
      Rights and Article 45 of the Regulations of the Inter-American Commission
      on Human Rights.   II.
      THE PARTIES    The
      following persons were present at the signing of this friendly settlement
      agreement:   a.
      Dr. Ramón Jiménez Carbo, Attorney General of the State, as
      indicated in his appointment and certificate of office, which are attached
      as qualifying documents;   b.
      Sister Elsie Hope Monge Yoder, on behalf of and in representation
      of Mr. José Patricio Reascos, as appears in the special power-of-attorney
      executed before the 33rd Notary of Quito, Mr. Nelson Prado; a copy of that
      document is also attached as a qualifying document.   III.
      STATE RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCEPTANCE  The
      Ecuadorian State acknowledges its international responsibility for having
      violated the human rights of Mr. José Patricio Reascos enshrined in
      Article 7 (personal liberty), Article 8 (a fair trial), and Article 25
      (judicial protection), and the general obligation set forth in Article
      1(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights and other international
      instruments, since the violations were committed by State agents, which
      could not be disproved by the State, giving rise to State responsibility.   Given
      the above, the Ecuadorian State accepts the facts in case Nº 11.779
      before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and undertakes the
      necessary reparative steps to compensate the victims, or their successors,
      for the damages caused by those violations.       IV.
      COMPENSATION   In
      view of the foregoing, the Ecuadorian State, through the Attorney General,
      as the sole judicial representative of the Ecuadorian State, pursuant to
      Article 215 of the Constitution of Ecuador, enacted in Official Register Nº
      1 and in force since August 11, 1998, is awarding Mr. José Patricio
      Reascos, a one-time compensatory payment of twenty thousand US dollars
      (US$ 20,000), or the equivalent in local currency, calculated at the
      exchange rate in effect at the time the payment is made, to be paid from
      the National Budget.   This
      compensation covers the consequential damages, loss of income, and moral
      damages suffered by Mr. José Patricio Reascos, and any other claim that
      Mr. José Patricio Reascos or his next-of-kin may have, regarding the
      subject of this agreement, under domestic and international law, and is
      chargeable to the National Budget. To this end, the Office of the Attorney
      General will notify the Ministry of Finance, for it to carry out this
      obligation within 90 days of the signing of this document.   V.
      PUNISHMENT OF THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE    The
      Ecuadorian State pledges to bring civil and criminal proceedings against
      and shall seek the punishment of those persons who are alleged to have
      participated in the violation in the performance of State functions or
      under the color of public authority. 
         The
      Office of the Attorney General pledges to encourage the State Attorney
      General, the competent judicial organs, and public agencies or private
      institutions to contribute legal evidence to determine the liability of
      those persons. If admissible, the prosecution will be subject to the
      constitution and laws of the Ecuadorian State.    VI.
      RIGHT TO SEEK INDEMNITY
         The
      Ecuadorian State reserves the right to seek indemnity, pursuant to Article
      22 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, from those persons
      found responsible for human rights violations through a final and firm
      judgment handed down by the country’s courts or when administrative
      liability is found, in keeping with Article 8 of the American Convention
      on Human Rights.                          
      VII.      
      TAX EXEMPTION AND DELAY IN COMPLIANCE    The
      payment made by the Ecuadorian State to the other party to this agreement
      is not subject to any current or future taxes, except for the 1% tax on
      capital flows.   In
      the event that the State is delinquent for over three months from the date
      the agreement is signed, it must pay interest on the amount owed,
      corresponding to the current bank rate of the three largest banks in
      Ecuador for the duration of its delinquency.                     
      VIII.      
       REPORTING   The
      Ecuadorian State, through the Office of the Attorney General, agrees to
      report every three months to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
      on compliance with the obligations assumed by the State in this friendly
      settlement agreement.  In
      keeping with its consistent practice and obligations under the American
      Convention, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights will oversee
      compliance with this agreement.                     
      IX.       
      LEGAL BASIS    The
      compensatory damages that the Ecuadorian State is awarding to Mr. José
      Patricio Reascos are provided for in Articles 22 and 24 of the
      Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, for violation of the
      constitution, other national laws, and the standards in the American
      Convention on Human Rights and other international human rights
      instruments.   This
      friendly settlement is entered into based on respect for the human rights
      enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights and other
      international human rights instruments and on the policy of the Government
      of Ecuador to respect and protect human rights.   X.
      NOTIFICATION AND CONFIRMATION
         Mr.
      José Patricio Reascos expressly authorizes the Attorney General to notify
      the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of this friendly settlement
      agreement, so that the Commission may confirm and ratify it in its
      entirety.   XI.
      ACCEPTANCE
         The
      parties to this agreement freely and voluntarily express their conformity
      with and their acceptance of the content of the preceding clauses and
      state for the record that they hereby end the dispute before the
      Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the international
      responsibility of the State for violating the rights of Mr. José Patricio
      Reascos.           
      V.         
      DETERMINATION OF COMPATIBILITY AND COMPLIANCE           
      11.         
      The Commission determined that the settlement agreement transcribed
      above is compatible with the terms of Article 48(1)(f) of the American
      Convention.           
      12.         
      CEDHU informed that Commission that “on June 11 [1999] an
      agreement was signed by which the State undertakes to punish the persons
      responsible for the violations alleged and to pay fair compensation within
      three months ... and on May 30, 2000, it proceeded to pay the victim the
      amount corresponding to compensation, yet did not pay the interest, also
      provided for in the agreement.”  On
      February 27, 2001, during an informal meeting, the State informed the
      Commission that the criminal proceedings have been initiated to determine
      the responsibility and punishment of the persons implicated in the alleged
      violations.           
      VI.         
      CONCLUSIONS           
      13.         
      The Commission reiterates its recognition of the Ecuadorian State
      for its decision to resolve this case by adopting measures of reparation,
      including those necessary to punish the persons responsible for the
      violations alleged.  The IACHR
      also reiterates its recognition of the petitioner for accepting the terms
      of the agreement.           
      14.         
      The IACHR will continue to monitor compliance with the commitment
      assumed by Ecuador with regard to the trial of the persons presumed
      responsible for the facts alleged, and payment of the interest for
      arrears.            
      15.         
      The IACHR ratifies that the possibility of friendly settlement
      provided for in the American Convention makes it possible to conclude the
      individual cases in a non-contentious manner, and has proven, in cases
      from several countries, to offer an important vehicle for solving alleged
      violations that can be used by both parties (petitioner and State). THE
      INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS,  DECIDES:           
      1.         
      To acknowledge that the State has made payment of US$ 20,000 as
      compensation, and the beginning of judicial proceedings to punish the
      persons implicated in the facts alleged.           
      2.         
      To urge the State to adopt the measures needed to comply with the
      commitments pending with respect to the trial of the persons presumed to
      be responsible for the facts alleged.           
      3.         
      To continue to monitor and supervise the implementation of each and
      every point of the friendly settlement agreement, and, in this context, to
      remind the State, through the Office of the Attorney General, of its
      commitment to inform the IACHR every three months of compliance with the
      obligations assumed by the State under this friendly settlement.           
      4.         
      To make this report public and include it in its Annual Report to
      the OAS General Assembly.  Done and signed at the headquarters of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, in the city of Washington, D.C., February 20, 2001. (Signed): Claudio Grossman, Chairman; Juan Méndez, First Vice-Chairman; Marta Altolaguirre, Second Vice-Chairman; Commissioners Hélio Bicudo, Robert K. Goldman, and Peter Laurie. [ Table of Contents | Previous | Next ] *
          Commissioner Julio Prado Vallejo, of Ecuadorian nationality, did not
          participate in the discussion of this case, in keeping with Article 19
          of the Commission’s Regulations. [1]
          Article 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates: The
          Judge may order pre-trial detention when he or she deems it necessary,
          so long as the following procedural data appear:   1.
          Indicia that trigger a presumption of the existence of an
          offense that merits deprivation of liberty; and, 2.
          Indicia that trigger a presumption that the accused is the
          perpetrator of or accomplice to the offense that is the subject of the
          proceeding.   The
          record shall indicate the indicia that are the grounds for the
          detention order. [2]
          Article 65 of the Law on Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances
          stipulates: Reduced
          penalties for possession for personal use: the punishment shall be one
          month to two years in prison when, in view of the small amount and all
          other circumstances, the possession of substances subject to control,
          one can deduce that they are for the immediate personal use of the
          possessor. In
          this case, having confirmed his or her physical or psychological
          dependency on narcotic or Psycho tropic substances, after a report by
          the forensic experts at the Office of the Attorney General, the judge
          may suspend the application of the penalty and submit the guilty
          person to curative security measures for the time needed for his or
          her detoxification and rehabilitation. This article was repealed on June 9, 1998.  |