Report No. 35 (2017) IACHR. Case No. 12.713 (Colombia)

• Case Number: 12.713
• Report Number: 35
• Respondent State: Colombia
• Case Type: Merits
• Court: Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
• Alleged Victim: José Rusbel Lara y otros

REPORT No. 35/17

CASE 12.713

REPORT ON THE MERITS (PUBLICATION)

JOSE RUSBEL LARA ET AL.

COLOMBIA

OEA/Ser.L/V/II.161

Doc. 42

21 M. 2017

Original: Spanish

Approved by the Commission at its session No. 2079 held on M. 21, 2017.

161^st regular period of sessions

Cite as: IACHR, R. No. 35/17, C.1., Merits (Publication), Jose R.L. et al., Colombia, M. 21, 2017.

www.cidh.org

REPORT No. 35/17

CASE 12.713

MERITS (PUBLICATION)

JOSÉ RUSBELL LARA ET AL.

COLOMBIA

MARCH 21, 2017

I. SUMMARY 3

II. PROCESSING BY THE COMMISSION 3

A. Processing of the case 3

B. Precautionary measures 4

III. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES ON MERITS 4

A. The Petitioners 4

B. The S. 6

IV. ANALYSIS 8

A. Context 8

B. J. R.L.'s work as a human rights defender 12

C. Events leading up to J.R.l L.'s murder 13

D. S. response to the situation of J.R.L. and precautionary measures granted by the IACHR to protect his life and well-being 15

E. Rusbell L.’s murder 19

F. Participation of the paramilitary group Bloque Vencedores de Arauca in the killing of J.R.l L. 22

G. Consequences of R.L.’s murder for his immediate family 24

H. The investigation of the crime 24

I. Continuation of proceedings against one of the accused following his extradition to the United S.s 33

V. LEGAL ANALYSIS 35

A. Preliminary matters 35

B. Right to life and humane treatment in connection with Article 1(1) of the Convention 37

C.... ....R. to a Fair Trial and Judicial Protection (Articles 8(1) and 25 of the American Convention in connection with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof) 46

D. Right to humane treatment (Article 5(1) of the American Convention in connection with Article 1(1) thereof) 59

VI. PROCEEDINGS SUBSEQUENT TO REPORT No. 2/13 61

VII. PROCEEDINGS SUBSEQUENT TO REPORT No. 49/16 62

VIII. ANALYSIS OF COMPLIANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS 62

IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 63

X. PUBLICATION 64

REPORT No. 35/17

CASE 12.713

MERITS (PUBLICATION)

JOSÉ RUSBELL LARA ET AL.

COLOMBIA

MARCH 21, 2017

1. SUMMARY

1. On M. 1, 2004, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or the “IACHR”) received a petition lodged by Asociación para la Promoción Social Alternativa (MINGA) (hereinafter “the petitioners”) alleging that the Republic of Colombia (hereinafter, “the S.” or “the C. S.”) bore international responsibility for the death of J.R.L., a human rights defender murdered on November 8, 2002, by members of a paramilitary group known as Bloque Vencedores de Arauca in the M. of Tame, Arauca Department. The petition alleges that the S. of Colombia is responsible on account of its failure to protect the life of J.R.l L., despite the fact that the latter had been beneficiary of precautionary measures ordered by the IACHR since J. 2002, and for its failure, after the murder, either to carry out a diligent investigation of the facts, or to punish all those responsible In particular, the petitioners say that the decision on the part of Colombia to extradite one of the individuals included in the investigation to the United S.s of America had obstructed the progress of the inquiry, prompting a situation of impunity.

2. On A. 5, 2009, the IACHR adopted R. 70/09,¹ in which it declared that the case was admissible with respect to the alleged violations of rights enshrined in Articles 2, 4(1), 8(1), and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter the "American Convention”) taken in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof, and inadmissible as regards the rights contained in Articles 13 and 16 of same.

3. In the stage on merits, the petitioners allege that the S. is responsible for violation of the rights to life, a fair trial, and judicial protection, as well as the obligation to adopt domestic legal provisions, envisaged in Articles 2, 4, 8, and 25 of the American Convention, to the detriment of J.R.L. and his family. The S. rejected the arguments of the petitioners regarding the purported violations of rights protected by the American Convention and claimed that it provided due protection for the life of J. R.L., conducted an effective investigation of the facts, and tried and convicted one of the persons responsible.

4. Having examined the arguments as to fact and law offered by the parties, the Commission has concluded that the S. is responsible for violation of Articles 4, 8, and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights taken in conjunction with Article 1(1) of that instrument, as well as for infringement of the obligation to adopt domestic legal provisions contained in Article 2 of the Convention. F., invoking the principle of iura novit curia, the Commission finds that the S. has also violated Article 5 of the American Convention to the detriment of J.R.L. and his family, in connection with Article 1(1) of that treaty.

2. PROCESSING BY THE COMMISSION

1. Processing of the case

5. On M. 29, 2006, the complaint alleging the murder of J. R.L. was registered as petition No. 1514/05, and on A. 5, 2009, after examining the petition for admissibility, the Commission adopted report 70/09 declaring the case admissible.² S., it found that the case was admissible with regard to the alleged violations of the rights enshrined in Articles 2, 4(1), 8(1), and 25 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 1 (1) thereof, but inadmissible in relation to the rights contained in Articles 13 and 16 of the American Convention. On A. 24, 2009, the Commission transmitted the report on admissibility to the parties and granted the petitioners two months to submit their arguments as to merits In the same communication, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to reaching a friendly settlement of the matter, for which purpose it requested them to state their interest in that regard at their earliest convenience. The parties expressed no interest in attempting a friendly settlement procedure.

6. On November 4, 2009, the petitioners requested that R.D.L., the son of J.R.L., along with the members of the J.S. Regional Human Rights Committee [Fundación Comité Regional de Derechos Humanos “J.S.” ] be recognized as alleged victims in the case. On September 7, 2009, the petitioners requested a hearing on the case at the 137th regular session of the IACHR, which the latter did not grant. In a written communication of J.8., 2010, the petitioners requested an extension of one month to submit their observations on merits. On J. 21, 2011, the IACHR received the petitioners’ observations on merits and relayed them to the S., giving the latter three months to present its response. On November 4, 2011, the S. requested an extension of one month to submit additional observations, which extension was granted by the IACHR. On December 5, 2011, the S. presented its observations on merits, which were conveyed to the petitioners so that they might offer such comments as they deemed appropriate within one month. The Inter-American Commission requested additional information from the S. in a note of A. 20, 2012. R. from the S. to this request were received on October 2, 2012 and October 30, 2012. That information was transmitted to the petitioners for their attention.

2. Precautionary measures

7. On J. 29, 2002, the petitioners requested the adoption of precautionary measures to protect the lives and safety of 14 social leaders and human rights defenders in the Department of Arauca, among them J.R.L.. That very day, the Commission issued a request to the C. S. to adopt precautionary measures, which was processed as number MC 218/02. On November 8, 2002, the petitioners advised the IACHR that J. R.L. had been killed that day in an attack with a firearm. The IACHR issued a press release on the incident on November 12, 2002.³

3. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES ON...