University of Minnesota




Castillo Páez Case, Reparations (art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights), Judgment of November 27, 1998, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Ser. C) No. 43 (1998).



 

In the Castillo Páez case,

 

the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, composed of the following judges:

 

Hernán Salgado-Pesantes, President

Antônio A. Cançado Trindade, Vice-President

Máximo Pacheco-Gómez, Judge

Oliver Jackman, Judge

Alirio Abreu-Burelli, Judge

Sergio García-Ramírez, Judge

Carlos Vicente de Roux-Rengifo, Judge

 

 

Also present:

 

 

Manuel E. Ventura-Robles, Secretary and

Víctor M. Rodríguez-Rescia, Assistant Secretary a.i.

 

Pursuant to articles 29, 55 and 56 of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter "the Court" or "the Inter-American Court"), in relation to Article 63(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter "the Convention" or "the American Convention") and in compliance with operative paragraph five of the judgment of November 3, 1997, enters the following judgment on reparations in this case, brought by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter "the Commission" or "the Inter-American Commission") against the Republic of Peru (hereinafter "Peru" or "the State").

 

I COMPETENCE

 

1. Under articles 62 and 63(1) of the Convention, the Court has jurisdiction to order reparations and costs in the instant case, inasmuch as Peru ratified the American Convention on July 28, 1978, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on January 21, 1981.

 

II BACKGROUND

 

2. The Inter-American Commission brought the instant case to the Court in an application dated January 13, 1995, attached to which was Report No. 19/94 of September 26, 1994. It had originated with a complaint (No. 10.733) against Peru, received at the Secretariat of the Commission on November 16, 1990.

 

3. In the operative part of the judgment that the Court issued on November 3, 1997, it unanimously decided the following:

 

 

1. That the State of Peru violated the right to personal liberty recognized in Article 7 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.

 

 

2. That the State of Peru violated the right to humane treatment recognized in Article 5 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.

 

 

3. That the State of Peru violated the right to life recognized in Article 4 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.

 

 

4. That the State of Peru violated the right to effective recourse to a competent national court or tribunal, recognized in Article 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez and his next of kin.

 

 

5. That the State of Peru is obliged to repair the consequences of those violations and compensate the victim’s next of kin and reimburse them for any expenses they may have incurred in their representations to the Peruvian authorities in connection with this case, for which purpose the proceeding remains open.

 

III PROCEEDINGS IN THE REPARATIONS STAGE

 

4. On December 10, 1997, the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President” decided the following:

 

1. To give the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights until February 10, 1998, to submit a brief and any evidence it may have in its possession for purposes of determining the compensation and costs in the instant case;

 

2. To give the next of kin of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, the victim in the instant case, or their representatives, until February 10, 1998 to submit a brief and any evidence they might have in its possession for purposes of determining the compensation and costs;

 

3. To give the State of Peru until April 10, 1998, to make its observations on the briefs that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the victim’s next of kin or their representatives submit pursuant to the preceding paragraphs.

 

5. On December 16, 1997, the Inter-American Commission informed the Court that it had named Mr. Domingo E. Acevedo, Mr. Carlos Ayala-Corao and Mr. Alvaro Tirado-Mejía as its delegates in the instant case. On June 18, 1998, Marcela Matamoros, who had been designated as the Commission’s assistant for the public hearing on preliminary objections, advised the Court that she was withdrawing from the case.

 

6. On January 27, 1998, the Commission requested a thirty-day extension of the deadline set by the President in his order of December 10, 1997, in order to submit its brief on the compensation and costs in the instant case. On January 28 and 29, 1998, the President extended the deadlines set for the Commission and the victim’s next of kin to February 25 of that year, and the State’s deadline to May 11, 1998.

 

7. On February 25, 1998, the Commission and the victim’s next of kin each submitted to the Court briefs on reparations, with the corresponding evidence, which were then forwarded to the State on March 12 of that year.

 

8. On March 9, 1998, the President sent a summons to the victim’s next of kin, to the Inter-American Commission and to Peru, for a public hearing on reparations, which was to be held at the seat of the Court on June 9, 1998. 

 

9. On March 11, 1998, the Secretary requested that the State submit the following documents: the 1991 sworn earnings statement of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo, a copy of the report prepared by the Office of the Inspector General of Police concerning the operation in which Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez had been detained on orders from the Ministry of the Interior, and any other intelligence relative to the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez and his whereabouts. By note of May 29, 1998, the State informed the Court that there was a legal impediment to supplying Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo’s sworn statement. The State also failed to supply the other documents that had been requested, despite the fact that the Secretariat had repeated the Court’s request on July 21 and again on August 26, 1998.

 

10. On March 24, 1998, the State filed a brief wherein it argued that the case should be closed since inasmuch as it had not received the reparations briefs of either the victim’s next of kin or of the Commission. The next day, the Secretariat informed the State that the reparations briefs had been submitted by the victim’s next of kin and the Commission on February 25 of that year and had been forwarded to the State on March 12.

 

11. On April 20, 1998, the Secretariat requested that the victim’s next of kin and the State indicate how many witnesses and experts they would call at the public hearing on June 9, 1998 (supra 8) and what the purpose of their testimony or expert testimony would be. Also, on instructions from the President, they were advised that "for the sake of procedural economy and speed, they [should] give particular consideration to the possibility of submitting some testimony and expert testimony in the form of sworn statements."

 

12. By note of April 29, 1998, the victim’s next of kin petitioned the Court to extend the deadline they were given to submit the "definitive list of witnesses" and to establish a deadline for submitting the sworn statements from the parents of the victim and from his sister, as well as the corresponding expert testimony.

 

13. On May 5, 1998, the Secretariat sent a note to the victim’s next of kin wherein it explained the criteria for introducing evidence at this stage of the proceedings and reported that the President had denied their request seeking an extension of the deadline for submitting the definitive list of witnesses and experts.  It also advised them that the date for submitting the sworn statements being offered in evidence would be set shortly.  By Secretariat note dated May 19, 1998, the victim’s next of kin were notified that the deadline for submitting the sworn statements would be June 5 of that year.

 

14. On May 11, 1998, Peru submitted its observations on the reparations briefs filed by the victim’s next of kin and by the Commission and attached documentary evidence.  It offered neither witnesses nor expert witnesses.

 

15.  On June 4, 1998, the victim’s next of kin submitted a power of attorney signed in Amsterdam, Kingdom of the Netherlands, on May 22, 1998; a statement made and signed in the presence of a notary by Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo, Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez and Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton, and a technical report prepared by Dr. Carmen Wurst-Calle de Landazuri on the "psychological consequences of disappearances and political asylum" and the appendix thereto.

 

16. On June 4, 1998, Peru named Ana Reátegui-Napurí as its alternate agent in the instant case.

 

17. On June 9, 1998, the Court held the public hearing on reparations and compensatory damages.

 

Appearing before the Court:

 

for the victim’s next of kin:

 

Ariel Dulitzky

Ronald Gamarra,

 

For the Inter-American Commission:

 

Domingo E. Acevedo, Delegate,

 

For the State of Peru:

 

Ana Reátegui-Napurí, Alternate Agent

Jennie Vizcarra-Alvizuri and

Walter Palomino-Cabezas.

 

18. On July 20, 1998, the State filed two briefs containing a number of objections to the affidavits signed in the presence of a notary, the expert report prepared by Dr. Carmen Wurst-Calle de Landazuri, and to the power of attorney submitted by the victim’s next of kin on June 4, 1998 (supra 15). The State’s contention was that the affidavits signed in the presence of a notary and submitted on June 23 of that year were extemporaneous. On August 22, 1998, the Secretariat replied that the case file showed that the statements in question were reported on June 11 of that year. On September 9, 1998, Peru petitioned the Court to inform it of the processing given to those objections; accordingly, on September 11, 1998, the Secretariat informed the State that the objections had been brought to the attention of both the Commission and the victim’s next of kin and would be seen by the Court at its forthcoming session.

 

19. By notes of July 21, 1998, and pursuant to Article 44 of its Rules of Procedure, the Court requested the victim’s next of kin, the Commission and the State to forward the following documents as evidence by August 21 of that year:

 

from the victim’s next of kin:

 

a) Certifications of the salaries earned by Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo and Ms. Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton between 1990 and the year in which they left for the Netherlands;

 

b) Certification of the proceedings conducted in the bankruptcy of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo;

 

c) Certification of the political-refugee status of Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez, in Sweden and in the Netherlands, and of her parents Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo and Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton in the Netherlands;

 

d) An itemization of the lost family earnings, presented in the brief on reparations they had filed the previous February;

 

e) Certification of the academic record of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, issued by the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru, during his years as a student, and

 

f) The sales contract for the home of the Castillo-Páez family and the official appraisal with the estimated price of the house.

 

From the Inter-American Commission:

 

a) Certifications of the salaries earned by Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo and Ms. Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton between 1990 and the year in which they left for the Netherlands;

 

b) Certification of the proceedings conducted in the bankruptcy of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo;

 

c) Certification of the political refugee status of Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez in both Sweden and the Netherlands, and of her parents Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo and Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton in the Netherlands, and

 

d) Certification of the academic records of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, issued by the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru, during his years as a student.

 

From the State:

 

a) Certification of the minimum salary a sociologist receives at the present time;

 

b) Life expectancy figures for Peru in 1990;

 

c) The official exchange rate of the United States dollar to the Peruvian currency, for the period from 1990 to 1998, issued by the Central Bank of Peru;

 

d) Peruvian legislation on the two annual job bonuses, which become a thirteenth monthly salary;

 

e) Peruvian legislation exempting petitions of habeas corpus and criminal proceedings from payment of court fees;

 

f) Law No. 26.926, of January 30, 1998, enacted on February 21, 1998, typifying genocide, forced disappearance and torture as crimes against humanity, even though there were precedents in the criminal code, and

 

g) Decree-Law No. 25.592, published July 2, 1992, which typifies the crime of forced disappearance.

 

In the same notes sent to the State, just as in an earlier note dated August 26, 1998, the Court reiterated the request it had made Peru on March 11, 1998, that it send the

 

[r]eport prepared by the Office of the Inspector General of Police on the operation in which Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez was detained on orders from the Ministry of the Interior, as mentioned in official memorandum 2558/DMC-CA, and any other available intelligence relative to the circumstances of the disappearance of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez.

 

20. On July 27, 1998, the State requested another hearing to "elaborate upon the observations made […] on the [r]eparations requested." On July 30, 1998, the Secretariat advised Peru that the President considered its request inadmissible.

 

21. On August 21 and 24, September 9, 11, 29 and 30, October 1, 9, 26 and 29, and November 2 and 11, all in 1998, the State forwarded some of the documents the Court had requested as additional, helpful evidence (infra 32). By notes dated August 20 and 28, 1998, the victim’s next of kin submitted some of the documents the Court had requested as helpful evidence for purposes of arriving at a more informed judgment (infra 28).  The Inter-American Commission, for its part, did not respond to the Court’s request for evidence.

 

22. On September 11, 1998, the State filed a brief with observations on the assessments made by the victim’s next of kin, wherein it reserved its right to express its view on the English-language publication of "Human Rights Watch/Americas/Helsinki" (HRW), submitted by the victim’s next of kin in their brief of August 20, 1998, until such time as a Spanish translation of that publication was made available to it. The State attached the following documents to its brief: a November 6, 1990 letter that the then Dean of the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru, Mr. Hugo Saravia-Swett, sent to the Minister of the Interior wherein reference was made to the disappearance of student Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, and press clippings on bankruptcy proceedings that had occurred in Peru. On October 2, 1998, the victim’s next of kin supplied a Spanish translation of the publication of "Human Rights Watch/Americas/Helsinki," which the Secretariat then forwarded to the State on October 5, 1998.

 

23. By a brief dated October 9, 1998, the State submitted its observations on the identification papers of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez and the consequences of the fact that the victim did not have those identification papers in his possession on the day the events in question occurred. It also pointed out that although the voter registration booklet had been issued on July 14, 1986, "it does not show any record of the individual having voted in the municipal and general elections" held, respectively, in 1989 and 1990, so that Castillo-Páez had not exercised his political rights.

 

24. In a brief from the State dated October 26, 1998, a registration record was received for Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, issued by the Chief of the Records Unit of the National Registry of Identification and Vital Statistics and a "certification issued by the Office of Remunerations and Benefits of the Office of Personnel of the Ministry of the Interior" regarding the salary that a sociologist at that agency receives.

 

IV EVIDENCE

 

 

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE PARTIES

 

25. By briefs dated February 25 and June 4, 1998, the victim’s next of kin offered the following documents as evidence:

 

a) The birth certificate and voter registration booklet of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez;

 

b) The marriage license of Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo and Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton;

 

c) The birth certificate of Ms. Mónica Inés Castillo;

 

d) The sworn testimony of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo during the Inter-American Court’s proceedings into the merits;

 

e) An autopsy report on Abel Malpartida-Páez, cousin of the victim, who allegedly disappeared under similar circumstances;

 

f) A copy of the canceled payment voucher of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez for the first semester of the 1990 at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru;

 

g) The teaching contract of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez with the Instituto Superior de Estudios Teológicos "Juan XXIII" [John XXIII Theological Studies Institute], signed September 6, 1988;

 

h) A salary pay slip of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez for October 1990;

 

i) A sworn statement, dated February 19, 1998, and a pay slip dated January 21, 1998, both from sociologist Manuel Piqueras-Luna;

 

j) A copy of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo’s "category four income tax withholding statement;"

 

k) A newspaper clipping titled "Comandante-Bomba. Este es Juan Carlos Mejía, el hombre más explosivo de la policía" [Commander Bomb. This is Juan Carlos Mejía, the most explosive man on the police force] in Revista Sí. No. 214, for the week of March 24 to 31, 1991, Lima, Peru, pp. 78-85;

 

l) A report by the office of the "Inspector General of Police on the operation in which Ernesto [Rafael] Castillo-Páez was detained on orders of the Ministry of the Interior;"

 

m) A statements signed in the presence of a notary in the Netherlands on May 25, 1998, by Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo, Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez and Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton; and

 

n) The technical report prepared by Dr. Carmen Wurst-Calle de Landazuri on the "psychological consequences of disappearances and political asylum" in the case of the next of kin of victims of human rights violations, and the appendix thereto.

 

26. In a brief of May 11, 1998, the State objected to part of the documentary evidence submitted by the victim’s next of kin. Concerning the certification of Manuel Piqueras, it stated that "under the austerity policy, and especially from 1990 onward, the government budget laws prohibited hiring, making the claim implausible." It also contested the statement made by the victim’s next of kin concerning the income of a sociologist in the public sector, asserting that it “is false and we dismiss it outright: not only is it utterly unsubstantiated but also appears to suggest that the amount in question is a monthly salary, which is misleading since Mr. Piqueras, being an appointee, would have had a higher salary than career members of the civil service. The State also challenged the evidentiary value of the autopsy report on Abel Malpartida-Páez, the victim’s cousin, "because this documentation is immaterial to the issue under discussion at this reparations and compensation stage."

 

27. With its briefs of May 11 and 29, July 20, September 11, October 9 and 26, all in 1998, the State submitted the following documentary evidence:

 

a) Law No. 26.479, June 14, 1995, published in "El Peruano" on June 15, 1995, whereby "a general amnesty is granted to military, police and civilian personnel for various cases;"

 

b) Law No. 26.492, June 30, 1995, published in "El Peruano" on July 2, 1995, which explains the "interpretation and scope of the amnesty granted under Law No. 26.479";

 

c) Judgment of the [Peruvian] Constitutional Tribunal, dated April 28, 1997, published in "El Peruano" on May 9, 1997, which "dismisses the case alleging the unconstitutionality of several articles of Laws Nos. 26.479 and 26.492;"

 

d) A copy of the "certification attesting to the absence of any application for intestate succession," issued by the Office of the Registrar of Lima and Callao, on May 6, 1998, attesting to the fact that the Office of Declaration of Heirs had "no record of any judgment or request [concerning intestate succession to the estate of [Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez];"

 

e) Official memorandum No. 00249661-98, certification of registration from the Chief of the Records Unit of the National Registry of Identification and Vital Statistics;

 

f) Official memorandum No. 485-98.R1-1200 of May 18, 1998, reporting an impediment to supplying the 1991 sworn earnings statement of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo;

 

g) Official memorandum No. 66-58-98-IN-1601-UNICA, July 1, 1998, signed by the Inspector of Migrations, Héctor Huamán-Maquiña, Deputy Director General of Migrations and Naturalization, Ministry of the Interior, concerning the "migration" of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo, Ms. Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez and Ms. Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton;

 

h) A letter from the rector of the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru, Mr. Hugo Saravia-Swett, to the Minister of the Interior, dated November 6, 1990;

 

i) Press clippings on bankruptcy proceedings in Peru; and

 

j) A copy of the voter registration booklet of state agent Mario Cavagnaro-Basile.

 

EVIDENCE REQUESTED EX OFICIO

 

28. On August 20 and 28, 1998, pursuant to a request the Court had made on July 21 (supra 19), the victim’s next of kin forwarded the following documents as additional helpful evidence:

 

a) The sworn income tax declaration of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo for the year 1991;

 

b) A copy of the cover and preface of the book "Cálculo Diferencial" (Differential Calculus) by Michel Helfgott and Tomás Núñez, containing an acknowledgment of the typing done by Ms. Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton;

 

c) A copy of the bankruptcy lawsuit of the APIS S.A. paper company, filed on August 13, 1998;

 

d) A copy of the certification issued by Swedish attorney Eva Ericson, attorney ex oficio for Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez, attesting to the political asylum proceedings conducted in Sweden;

 

e) A copy, in English, of the report from the publication by "Human Rights Watch/Americas/Helsinki" of September 1996, vol. 8, No. 14 (D), p. 29;

 

f) A copy of transcript No. 0002691 of the courses passed by Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, issued on February 23, 1998 by the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru;

 

g) Request of August 19, 1998, to the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru to certify that Mr. Castillo-Páez was enrolled in the second semester;

 

h) A copy of the August 10, 1998 request for a certified transcript of the academic records of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez;

 

i) A copy of the sales contract for the house of the Castillo-Páez family, dated July 18, 1997;

 

j) A copy of the Dutch identity papers that grant political refuge to Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez and Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo, and humanitarian asylum to Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton;

 

k) A copy of the cancelled payment voucher in the name of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez for the first semester of the 1990 academic year at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru;

 

l) A copy of an uncancelled payment voucher in the name of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez for the second semester of the 1990 academic year at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru; and

 

m) Press clippings titled: "En la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos está el caso Castillo Páez" (Castillo Páez case at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights) and "Policías asesinaron a estudiante" (Police killed student. ")

 

29. In its brief of September 11, 1998, the State challenged a number of the documents submitted by the victim’s next of kin as evidence. It pointed out that the costs alleged to represent the earnings lost by the parents due to the victim’s disappearance "are merely unsubstantiated claims, with no evidence to prove them." It also indicated that “a typing acknowledgment in the prologue of a book […] is hardly proof of gainful employment, much less permanent employment." Moreover, the State objected to the uncancelled payment voucher from the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru, arguing that “it has no validity inasmuch as it bears no cancellation mark."

 

30.  The Court’s request notwithstanding (supra 19), the victim’s next of kin did not supply the following documents requested as evidence:

 

a) Certification of the salaries of Mr. Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo for the years 1990, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, or any for Ms. Carmen Warton-Páez;

 

b) Certification of the academic records of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez, issued by the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru for his years as a student; and

 

c) An official appraisal of the Castillo-Páez family home.

 

31. As the case file shows, thus far none of the documents that the Court requested of the Commission as evidence to help the former arrive at a more informed judgment has been received (supra 19).

 

32. In response to the Secretariat’s notes of July 21, August 26, September 11 and 21, October 2 and 21, 1998, the State, through submissions dated August 21 and 24, September 9, 11, 29 and 30, October 1, 9, 26 and 29, and November 2 and 11, 1998, sent the following documents as evidence to help the Court arrive at a more informed judgment:

 

a) Law No. 26,926 of February 19, 1998, published in "El Peruano", February 21, 1998, which "amends several articles of the Penal Code and introduces Title XIV-A, concerning crimes against humanity;"

 

b) Decree-Law No. 25,592, dated June 26, 1992, published in "El Peruano", July 2, 1992, establishing "a penalty of incarceration for public officials or civil servants who deny any person his freedom by ordering or executing actions that result in said person’s disappearance;"

 

c) A copy of Law No. 25,139 dated December 14, 1989, on the annual Independence Day and Christmas Day bonuses;

 

d) Supreme Decree No. 061-98-EF, dated July 6, 1998, published in "El Peruano" on July 7, 1998, whereby "government pensioners, officials and civil servants are granted the National Holidays (Fiestas Patrias");

 

e) Report No. 0053-98-GAFSP-GG-PJ for an extra month’s pay, in accordance with Legislative Decree No. 728;

 

f) A photostat copy of Legislative Decree No. 276, "Statute of Government Service and Public Sector Remuneration", dated March 6, 1984, published in "El Peruano" on March 24, 1984;

 

g) A photostat copy of the Initial Implementing Legislation for Legislative Decree No. 276, Supreme Decree No. 018-85-PCM of February 28, 1985;

 

h) Law No. 26,894, of December 10, 1997, "1998 Public Sector Budget Law", published in "El Peruano" on December 11, 1997;

 

i) Emergency Decree No. 107-97, dated December 5, 1997, published in "El Peruano" on December 6, 1997, whereby "a Christmas bonus is granted to government pensioners, officials and civil servants, armed forces and national police personnel;"

 

j) Law No. 23,506 "Habeas Corpus and Amparo Law", dated December 7, 1982, published in "El Peruano" on December 8, 1982.

 

k) Law No. 25,398, "Law supplementing the provisions of Law No. 23,506 on the matter of Habeas Corpus and Amparo", of February 6, 1992, published in "El Peruano" on February 9, 1992;

 

l) Law No. 26.846, of July 23, 1997, published in "El Peruano" on July 27, 1997, which "establishes principles that are the basis for payment of court fees and that amends the Civil Code and Judiciary Statute";

 

m) Judiciary Statute of July 23, 1997, published in "El Peruano" on July 27, 1997;

 

n) A photostat copy of Article 24 of the Judiciary Statute;

 

o) Official memorandum No. 7220-98, dated September 3, 1998, on the official exchange rate between the Peruvian currency and the United States dollar from January 1990 to June 1998, issued by the head of the Department of Economic Statistics and Studies of the Office of the Superintendent of Banking and Insurance;

 

p) Supreme Decree No. 069-85-PCM, dated July 26, 1985, published in "El Peruano" on July 27, 1985;

 

q) A photostat copy of Decree-Law No. 22,482 of March 27, 1979, on the "maternity and nursing subsidies currently in effect";

 

r) A photostat copy of Decree-Law No. 18.846, dated April 28, 1971, on "Job-related Accidents";

 

s) Law No. 24.993, of January 19, 1989, published in "El Peruano" on January 21, 1989, whereby the "Peruvian Sociologists Association is created";

 

t) Life expectancy chart for the 1990-1995 five-year period, broken down by sex, published in the document titled "Proyecciones de Población del Peru 1995-2025" (Peruvian population forecasts 1995-2025), official memorandum No. 199-98-INEI/DTDES, dated August 18, 1998, from the head of the National Institute of Statistics and Informatics;

 

u) Certification issued by the Office of Remunerations and Benefits of the Office of Personnel of the "Ministry of the Interior" on a sociologist’s salary at that agency as of September 1998; and

 

v) Urgent Decree 074-97, dated July 31, 1997, published in "El Peruano" on August 3, 1997, on the minimum lifetime remuneration of workers in the private sector in Peru.

 

33. The Commission and the victim’s next of kin made no objections to the documents submitted by the State.

 

OTHER EVIDENCE

 

34. On April 29, 1998, the victim’s next of kin reported that given the request made by the President (supra 11) and "the limited means they had to produce the evidence, " the victim’s next of kin would not be deposed before the Court and would instead submit