Report No. 167 (2018) IACHR. Case No. 12.957 (Ecuador)

• Case Number: 12.957
• Year: 2018
• Report Number: 167
• Respondent State: Ecuador
• Case Type: Friendly Settlements
• Court: Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
• Alleged Victim: Luis Bolívar Hernández Peñaherrera

REPORT No. 167/18

CASE 12.957

FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT REPORT

LUIS BOLIVAR HERNANDEZ PEÑAHERRERA

ECUADOR

Approved electronically by the Commission on December 21, 2018

OEA/Ser.L/V/II.150

Doc. 192

21 December 2018

Original: Spanish

Cite as: IACHR, Report No. 167/18, Ca se 12.957. Friendly Settlement. L..B..H......

.

P.. Ecuador. December 21, 2018.

www.cidh.org

1

REPORT No. 167/18

CASE 12.957

FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT

L..B..H..P.

ECUADOR

DECEMBER 21, 2016

I. SUMMARY AND RELEVANT PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF THE FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT

BEFORE THE IACHR

1. On March 13, 2003, the Inter-A.ican Commission on H.n R.s (hereinafter “the

Inter-A.an Commission”, “the Commission”, or “the IACHR”) received a petition against the R epublic of

Ecuador (“Ecuador” or “the S.e”), originally filed by A..P...V. and Mr. L..B...

.

H..P., who subsequently credited his representation to Mr. Inigo Salvador Crepos

(hereinafter “the petitioner” or “the petitioners”), in replacement of Mr. P..V..

2. The petitioner argued that, in the context of the evaluation process for his promotion to the

rank of B rigadier General, M..P. was deni ed promotion for a purported lack of suitability to the

position. It is alleged that, despite meeting all the legal requirements for such purposes, the petitio ner was

prevented from continuing his military career without having the responsible military authorities explain the

reasons why he was considered “ineligible” for promotion. The petition er asserted that this actually consisted

of an act of retaliation against Mr. H..P.herrera for promoting the admission of women officers

into the Armed Forces. F., they claimed that the victim lacked adequate and effective resources to

properly take notice of the reasons why he had been denied promotion or r equest a review of the decision.

3. On J.ly 21, 2014, the IACHR approved its Admissibility Report No. 53/14 declaring the claim

admissible for the alleged violation of human rights enshrined in A.icles 8 (R. to a fair trial), 13 (R. to

freedom of thought and expression), 24 (R. to equal protection) and 25 (R. to judicial protection) in

relation to A.icle 1.1 of the A.an Convention on H.n R.s (“A.an Convention”). The

Commission also established the inadmissibility of the claim with r egards the alleged violation of A.icles 2

and 11 of the A.an Convention. A., it decided to notify the parties on the decision of the report

and determined its publication on the IACHR’s Annual Report.

4. On October 2017, the petitioner informed about his will to initiate a friendly settlement

procedure, which the State agre ed to on March 13, 2018. On September 24, 2018, the parties signed a friendly

settlement agreement. On October 10, 2018, the S. request ed the Commission to proceed with the

homologation of the agreement, in light of A.icle 49 of the A.an Convention on H.n R.s, request

endorsed by the petitioner on October 29, 2018.

5. As prescribed in A.icle 49 of the Co nvention and A.icle 40.5 of the Commission’s Rules of

Procedure, the friendly s ettlement report summarizes the facts alleged by the petitioner, reproduces de

friendly settlement agreement signed on Septem ber 24, 2018, between the petitioner and the S.e of

Ecuador, and includes an assessment on the degree of compliance with the agreement. A., it

describes the findings relating to the compatibility standard between the friendly settlement agreem ent and

the objects and purposes of the Convention. F., the Commission decides to publish this report and

include it in the Annual Report of the IACHR to the General Assembly of the Organization of A.an S.es.

II. ALLEGED FACTS

6. The petitioner argued that Mr. P. was a member of the Ecuadorean Army on active

duty, institution where he attained the rank of Colonel of the J..n...S., They also pointed out that Mr.

P. earned important decorations during his military career and was never subject to disciplinary

acts or other proceedings of similar character.