Arrom Suhurt et al. v. Paraguay
Deprivation of Liberty
The Court did not establish the international responsibility of the State as it considered that the evidence presented before it was insufficient to conclude that the victims were deprived of their liberty by State agents or with their acquiescence.
On the duty to initiate an investigation ex officio, the Court found that this case did not fall within the context of a systemic and generalised practice of enforced disappearances. There was also no evidence to demonstrate that the alleged victims were in the hands of State agents before the alleged events occurred. The Court emphasised that the authorities had initiated searches and an investigation. Consequently, the Court did not find it appropriate to rule on reparations, costs and expenses.
May 13, 2019
Articles not violated / not dealt with
Article 1(1) [ACHR], Article 3 [ACHR], Article 4 [ACHR], Article 5 [ACHR], Article 7 [ACHR], Article 8(1) [ACHR], Article 25(1) [ACHR], Article 1(a) [IACFDP], Article 7(b) [IACFDP], Article 1 [IACPPT], Article 6 [IACPPT], Article 8 [IACPPT]
Facts of the Case
On 17 January 2002, Mr. Juan Fransisco Arrom Suhurt and Mr. Anuncio Martí Méndez were arrested by armed men in civilian clothes, beaten, suffocated and interrogated about the kidnapping of a woman and about the organisation "Patria Libre". Both were detained until 30 January, when they were found in a house. Following their release, both victims identified several state agents as their captors.