Isaza Uribe et al. v. Colombia
Deprivation of Liberty | Judicial Protection | Juridical Personality | Right to Know the Truth | State/Non-State Agents
The Court determined that the disappearance occurred from the moment the victim was taken from the prison and not from the very beginning of the detention, which had been formally and legally ordered by a judge. The Court recalled the particular duties States have regarding the protection of persons in the custody of State agents. It also recalled the obligation of States to provide an explanation in cases where the rights of those in custody are violated, such as through sustaining injuries. The Court considered that the lack of a convincing explanation, which would disprove any allegations regarding the responsibility of the State, gives rise to a presumption of State responsibility. This presumption of State responsibility is also applicable in situations in which a person disappears in State custody.
November 20, 2018
Article 1(1) [ACHR], Article 2 [ACHR], Article 3 [ACHR], Article 4(1) [ACHR], Article 5 [ACHR], Article 5(1) [ACHR], Article 7 [ACHR], Article 8(1) [ACHR], Article 25 [ACHR], Article 1(a) [IACFDP]
Facts of the Case
The facts of the case took place in an area of strategic and economic importance mainly due to its geographical position, which favoured the activity of illegal armed groups and situations of violence against the civilian population. On 27 October 1987, Mr. Víctor Manuel Isaza Uribe was arrested by police officers and remanded in custody in connection with the murder of a person linked to the "Cementos del Nare" company, where he had worked for 13 years. In the early morning of 19 November 1987, a group of between eight and 10 armed men, some in civilian clothes and others in military uniform, entered the prison and abducted Mr. Isaza Uribe and three other detainees.