Osorio Rivera v. Peru
Deprivation of Liberty | Evidence | Systemic Practice
The Court, relying on the work of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, found that the elements of the crime of enforced disappearance could be made out even where the initial detention or arrest was legal. Accordingly it found that the complex crime of enforced disappearances can sometimes be initiated by a lawful arrest or detention.
September 26, 2013
Article 1(1) [ACHR], Article 2 [ACHR], Article 3 [ACHR], Article 4(1) [ACHR], Article 5(1) [ACHR], Article 5(2) [ACHR], Article 7 [ACHR], Article 8(1) [ACHR], Article 25(1) [ACHR], Article 1(a) [IACFDP], Article 1(b) [IACFDP], Article 3 [IACFDP]
Facts of the Case
In April 1991, Mr. Jeremías Osorio Rivera was detained by a military patrol as part of state of emergency military operations aimed at capturing suspected terrorists. The patrol detained Mr. Osorio Rivera and transported him to a "Counter-Subversive Base" detention centre. A few days later, the patrol transported Mr. Osorio Rivera to another village, wearing a ski mask and with his hands tied. This was the last time that the victim was seen by his family members. Eye-witness testimony suggested that Mr. Osorio Rivera had been ill-treated whilst in detention.