Report No. 155 (2021) IACHR. Petition No. 151-15 (Brazil)

• Case Type: Admissibility
• Court: Inter-American Comission of Human Rights

REPORT No. 155/21

PETITION 151-15

REPORT ON ADMISSIBILITY

MARCOS REBELLO FILHO ET AL.

BRAZIL

OEA/Ser.L/V/II.

D.. 163

28 J. 2021

Original: Portuguese

Adopted electronically by the Commission on J. 21, 2021.

Cite as: IACHR, R. No. 155/21, Petition 151-15, Admissibility, M. Rebello Filho et al., Brazil [Date of adoption].

www.iachr.org

I. INFORMATION ABOUT THE PETITION

Petitioner(s)	Defensoria Pública do Estado de S.P. (Office of the Public Defender of the S. of S.P.)
Alleged victim(s)	M. Rebello Filho, T.R.S., E.R.S. dos S., W.L.d.S., D.V. dos S. Miranda, A.P.G.d.S., E.J.O., R.P.N., M.A. de Freitas, R. Monteiro Ferreira, and their family members: D. M. da Silva (E.R.S. dos S.’ mother), Edinalva S. (M. Rebello Filho’s mother), Vera Lúcia Gonzaga dos S. (A.P. Gonzaga dos S.’ mother and E.J.O.’s mother-in-law), R. de Cássia Ribeiro (R. Monteiro Ferreira’s mother), M. da Pureza de A.N. (R.P.N.’s grandmother), C. da Silva Noronha (R.P.N.’s brother), I.M. de J.S.(.R.S.’ mother), M.S.L.(.L. dos S.’ mother), V.L.A. de Freitas (M.A. de Freitas’ mother), J.I.C. de Freitas (M.A. de Freitas’ father)
Respondent S.	Brazil1
Rights allegedly violated	Articles 4 (life), 5 (humane treatment), 7 (personal liberty), 8 (fair trial), 25 (judicial protection) of the American Convention on Human Rights2 in connection with Article 1(1) thereof the Convention (obligation to respect rights)

II. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IACHR3

Filing of the petition	M. 16th, 2015
N. of the petition to the S.	April 24, 2018
S.’s first response	August 1, 2018
Additional observations of the petitioner(s)	August 20, 2018; September 4, 2018; M. 24, 2019; October 23, 2019; J. 8, 2020
Additional observations of the S.	January 25, 2019; J. 18, 2019

III. COMPETENCE

Competence ratione personae	Y.
Competence ratione loci	Y.
Competence ratione temporis	Y.
Competence ratione materiae	Y., American Convention (instrument adopted on September 25, 1992)

IV. DUPLICATION OF PROCEDURES AND INTERNATIONAL RES JUDICATA, COLORABLE CLAIM, EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES AND TIMELINESS OF THE PETITION

Duplication of procedures and international res judicata	No
Rights declared admissible	Articles 4 (life), 5 (humane treatment), 7 (personal liberty), 8 (fair trial) and 25 (judicial protection) of the American Convention in relation to its articles 1(1) (obligation to respect rights) and 2 (domestic legal effects) thereof
E. of domestic remedies or applicability of an exception to the rule:	Y.. V.S.V. below
Timeliness of the petition	Y.. V.S.V. below

V. ALLEGED FACTS

1. The petitioner asserts that the B. S. is responsible for human rights violations resulting from assaults and summary executions committed by police officers in M. 2006 and M. 2007 in the city of S., S.P. state, as well as the subsequent impunity, to the detriment of the persons executed and their families. The table below, prepared by the inter-American Commission in light of the allegations and evidence presented by the petitioner, describes and systematizes the facts alleged:

Deaths of M.R.F. and T.R.S. on M. 14, 2006

On M. 14, 2006, at around 11:30 p.m., while the young men M., T.a.J.F. da Silva (22 years old), were at a pizzeria/game store situated at an unnumbered property on Rua São Francisco in downtown S., when two hooded men on a black motorcycle and four hooded men in a black Fiat Marea car arrived. Two of them were wearing gray pants and black boots. T. called T. (known as “Amarelinho”) outside and shot him. Then they went in and shot M.a.J.. M. received 3 shots to the head at close range; T., 9 shots (8 from behind): 2 in the head, 1 in the back, 1 in the thigh, and 5 in the forearms; and Jó, 8 shots. The first two died from their wounds and Job was left a paraplegic.

Aspects related to the investigation of the killings of M. Rebello Filho and T.R.S.

During the investigations into the crime, which were registered in Police Inquiry No. 120/06 of S. 5th Police District and registered as Police Inquiry No. 184/06 of the 1st Criminal Trial Court (Vara Criminal e do Júri) of S., it was initially found that M. had a record of drug possession in 1999, in S.S., and that T. used marijuana and had a record as a teenager. T. information was used to morally disqualify the boys and served to justify the actions of their executioners. The police investigation report would use that evidence as a way of qualifying the killings. A female eyewitness (whose name is withheld for security reasons) told M.’ family that military police officers known by the nicknames “Bolacha,” “B.,” “Derinho,” and A. were involved in the killing of the young men. M.’ mother, Edinalva, reported having passed on the contact information of this witness to the 5th Police District. When she later visited the witness’ home, she learned that the witness had been threatened and assaulted by military police officers at her home. The police officers had threatened to fake a flagrante [to claim, fraudulently, to have caught her in the act of committing a crime] to justify her arrest. A. those threats, the witness did not identify anyone when she was formally heard at the inquiry. He said, however, that he saw four hooded people in a black Marea and that two of them were wearing gray pants and black boots, items that are part of the uniform worn by the Military Police of the S. of S.P.. The policeman “Bolacha,” identified as E.M. da Silva and stationed at the 1st Shock Battalion, Rota de S., owned a black Marea exactly like the one recognized by the people who were at the pizzeria. T. was discovered after a relative of the victims recognized the car, photographed the license plate, and requested that it be traced. Police officer E. gave testimony during the inquiries, but denied participation in the crime, saying that on the day of the events he had been at his mother’s house in the city of Praia Grande. R., E. subsequently left the Police Department and moved to another state. The owner of the establishment, when heard, stated that moments before the attack a Military Police vehicle passed by the place at low speed, carefully observing the interior of the pizzeria/shop. T.’s mother, I.M. de J.S. said in a statement to the Justice and Peace Commission of the Archdiocese of São Paulo (CJP) that T. had no criminal record. She said that several people witnessed the crime and told her how it happened. She also said that T. had already mentioned to her several instances of harassment, assaults, and threatening of young people in the neighborhood by police, saying that if anything happened to him, the person responsible would be a police officer called “B..” I. also said that when she went to the 7th Police District, right after the crime, she encountered military police officers there armed with machine guns and hoods. Also, in a statement to CJP, E.S., M.’ mother-in-law, confirmed that it was “B.” who shot T., because he raised his hood at a certain moment and people who were in the place reportedly saw him. Those same people reported that the shooters collected the shell casings from the scene. However, the record does not show that those people were summoned to testify. M.’ mother also said that her son was threatened by “Bolacha,” who had a black Marea car, and that he had already been assaulted by another policeman named A.. F., she said that those two policemen had threatened the above-mentioned eyewitness. There is no record in the investigation of Police Officer A. being called to provide information about the facts. D. M. da Silva reported that on the morning of the day after the executions, she spoke by phone with the military police officer known as “B.,” who was a distant family member of hers. The policeman told her to tell all her acquaintances, but “not the trash,” not to leave their homes that day, because anyone who was on the street would be considered an “enemy of the Police.” He asked D. if his name was being linked to the deaths of T. (Amarelinho), M.a.J. the night before. D. said yes, and he then said that “we couldn’t stand this kid anymore, saying that he had killed and humiliated an MP [military policeman],” and that the policemen made the boy “kneel down and urinate on himself before he died. F., he said that he was in the car and that he had passed by the place, but that he had not taken part in the executions. T. policeman was also not called to testify during the police investigation. The police investigation was closed on M. 7, 2008, and the crime remained unsolved. Among the flaws in the investigation of the case, the petitioner highlighted (i) a general failure to exhaust possible lines of inquiry in the investigation and, more specifically, (ii) a failure to preserve and forensically examine the crime scene; and (iii) the lack of testimony from the police officers known as A. and “B..”

Killing of E.R.S. dos S. on M. 15, 2006

E. was riding the motorcycle of a friend, R., when he ran out of fuel. He pushed the motorcycle to a gas station called Umuarama, located at the 673 Avenida Nossa Senhora de Fátima and the corner with R.J. de M., which was closed. From there he called R., who arrived riding the motorcycle that belonged to E.. S. after, together with a security guard and a gas station attendant, the 4 were approached by 8 military police officers in a...