Report No. 109 (2014) IACHR. Petition No. 301-05 (Perú)

• Year: 2014
• Petition Number: 301-05
• Report Number: 109
• Respondent State: Perú
• Case Type: Archive
• Court: Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
• Alleged Victim: Eleazar Guevara Julián Disponible en

REPORT No. 109/14

PETITION 301-05

REPORT ON ARCHIVE

ELEAZAR GUEVARA JULIÁN

PERU

OEA/Ser.L/V/II.153

Doc. 25

7 November 2014

Original: Spanish

Approved by the Commission at its session No. 2016 held on November 7, 2014
153 Regular Period of Sessions

Cite as: IACHR, Report No. 109/14, Petition 301-05. A.. E.G.J.. Perú. November 7, 2014.

www.cidh.org

REPORT No. 109/14

PETITION 301-05

ARCHIVE REPORT

ELEAZAR GUEVARA JULIÁN

PERU

NOVEMBER 7, 2014

ALLEGED VICTIM: E.G.J.

PETITIONERS: Eleazar Guevara Julián

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS: Articles 1.1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 24 of the American Convention on Human Rights

DATE OF INITIAL PROCESSING: September 3, 2008

I.POSITION OF THE PETITIONERS

1. The petitioner declared that he was arrested by members of the National Police of Peru on J.9., 1993, together with two friends. He said that at the time of their arrest they were beaten and accused of terrorism. He indicated that he was taken to the police base in Jaén and subsequently to the DINCOTE facilities, where he remained for 40 days, during which he was tortured to get him to accept responsibility for the acts for which he was charged. The petitioner claims that the police fabricated a police report, in violation of his right to a fair trial, but primarily his right to defense since his attorney was not allowed to participate in all of the proceedings and was prevented from meeting with him in private. He also said that he was later brought before a military court, which sentenced him to 20 years in prison. He indicated that he was detained in the Picsi-Chilayo prison, where he was subjected to inhumane detention conditions, which included being obliged to remain in his cell for 23½ hours a day and being subjected to visiting regulations whereby he could only be visited by immediate family for 30 minutes. The petitioner stated that the trial before the military court was nullified as a result of the action of unconstitutionality of January 3, 2003, and a new trial was opened against him before ordinary courts, in violation of the freedom from ex post facto laws. In that trial, he was sentenced to 14 years of deprivation of liberty.

II.POSITION OF THE STATE

2. The S. declared that the petitioner was initially tried by a military court for the crime of treason but that a new trial was opened against him before ordinary courts. It stated that on April 6, 2006, the National Criminal Chamber convicted the petitioner for the crime of terrorism and sentenced him to 14 years of deprivation of liberty, a term that would end on J.8., 2007, calculated from his initial detention in June 1993. It mentioned that the criminal liability of the petitioner was fully established during this trial by the statement he made in the presence of the representative of the Office of the Public Prosecutor and his defense counsel, in which he admitted to having been a member of the “Shining Path” armed group since 1993, as well as having his domicile be used as a meeting place. Following that declaration, the petitioner filed an affidavit affirming that what he had previously declared and signed had been extracted under torture and by blackmail. This notwithstanding the National Criminal Chamber convicted him, alleging that the evidence submitted fully established his criminal liability.

3. The S. reported that, during...