Human Rights

 

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

U.S. Decisions 2003

Voting Rights

REPORT Nº 98/03
CASE 11.204
STATEHOOD SOLIDARITY COMMITTEE
UNITED STATES
December 29, 2003

http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2003eng/USA.11204.htm

Petitioners allege that District of Columbia residents are without effective representation in the U.S. federal legislature because they have no Senate representation and no effective vote in the House of Representatives.  The Commission found State violations of the right to equality under Article II and the right to vote and participate in government under article XX of the American Declaration.  The State did not contest that the Constitution limited the rights of D.C. residents to elect representatives to the national legislature.  The Commission rejected the State’s argument that alternate measures such as Congressional “shadow representatives” were sufficient to remedy this limitation.  The Commission also expressed a concern that the absence of Congressional representation has had a disproportionately prejudicial impact upon the largely African-American population in D.C. but did not consider itself adequately briefed to enable it to make a specific determination on whether a racially discriminatory intent existed.  The Commission also found that the justification for limiting effective representation—that D.C. residents would have a disproportionate effect on national politics because of their proximity to the machinery of government--was insufficient in spite of their deferential approach.  The Commission recommended that the State provide petitioners with an effective remedy, which includes “adopting the legislative or other measures necessary to guarantee the Petitioners the effective right to participate, directly or through freely chosen representatives and in general conditions of equality, in their national legislature.”

Juvenile Death Penalty

REPORT Nº 101/03

CASE 12.412

NAPOLEON BEAZLEY

UNITED STATES

December 29, 2003

http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2003eng/USA.11412.htm

The Commission found that the United States had violated customary law and a jus cogens norm against executing juveniles when it executed Mr. Beazley for a crime he was charged with committing when he was seventeen years old.  Since the State executed Mr. Beazley 7 months after the Commission had issued its preliminary report asserting the existence of this jus cogens norm in Domingues v. United States, the Commission adopted the Domingues findings for this report.  The Commission consequently found the United States had violated Mr. Beazley’s right to life under Article I by acting contrary to the international norm against the juvenile death penalty.  The petitioners’ other claims regarding violations of Articles I, II, VII, and XXVI were found admissible.  The Commission also stated that the United States violated its fundamental human rights obligations under the OAS Charter and related instruments by executing Mr. Beazley in spite of the Commission’s request that he not be executed pending review of his complaint.  The Commission viewed the State’s failure to comply with the request for precautionary measures to be extremely grave and called upon the United States to take all steps necessary to comply with present and future requests.  The Commission recommended that Mr. Beazley’s next-of-kin be provided with an effective remedy including compensation, and that the State ensure that the death penalty is not imposed for crimes committed under the age of 18.

REPORT Nº 97/03

CASE 11.193
MERITS

GARY T. GRAHAM, now known as SHAKA SANKOFA

UNITED STATES

December 29, 2003

http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2003eng/USA.11193.htm

The Commission concluded that the State violated Mr. Sankofa’s right to a fair trial and due process of law (articles XVIII and XXVI) in his conviction and sentencing.  It also concluded that the State violated his fundamental right to life under Article I when it executed him based on this criminal proceedings and the State had acted contrary to an international jus cogens norm encompassed in the right to life because it executed him for a crime he was found to have committed when he was 17 years old.  As a result of finding that his execution was prohibited because of the jus cogens norm, the Commission did not find it necessary to address the petitioners’ claim that the length of Mr. Sankofa’s incarceration on death row violated his right not to be subjected to torture or cruel and unusual punishment.  The Commission recommended that the next-of-kin of Mr. Sankofa be provided with an effective remedy which includes compensation; that the State review its laws, procedures and practices to ensure that similar violations do not occur in future capital proceedings; and that the State ensure that capital punishment is not imposed for a crime committed under the age of 18.

REPORT Nº 100/03

CASE 12.240

DOUGLAS CHRISTOPHER THOMAS

UNITED STATES

December 29, 2003

http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2003eng/USA.12240.htm

The Commission found that the United States had violated customary law and a jus cogens norm against executing juveniles when it executed Mr. Thomas for a crime he was charged with committing when he was seventeen years old.  Even though the Commission had not yet asserted the existence of this norm in Domingues v. United States when the State executed Mr. Thomas, the Commission argued that the preponderance of evidence on international and state practice against the juvenile death penalty existed at that time of Mr. Thomas’ execution.  The Commission consequently found the United States to have violated Mr. Thomas’s right to life under Article I.  Because of this finding, the Commission did not find it necessary to comment on the other alleged violations.   The Commission also stated that the United States violated its fundamental human rights obligations under the OAS Charter and related instruments by executing Mr. Thomas in spite of the Commission’s request that he not be executed pending review of his complaint.  The Commission viewed the State’s failure to comply with the request for precautionary measures to be extremely grave and called upon the United States to take all steps necessary to comply with present and future requests.

Death Penalty/Consular Rights

REPORT Nº 99/03

CASE 11.331

MERITS

CESAR FIERRO

UNITED STATES

December 29, 2003

http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2003eng/USA.11331.htm

The Commission found violations of the rights of Mr. Fierro, a Mexican national on death row in Texas, consisting of violations of his right to a fair hearing under Article XVIII, his right to due process of law under article XXVI, and violations of his rights under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Petitioners also alleged that Mr. Fierro’s confession was coerced because his mother and step-father were taken into detention by the Juarez police who threatened their well-being if Mr. Fierro failed to cooperate.  As a result of this allegation, the Commission found the violation of Mr. Fierro’s consular rights to have had a particularly serious impact on the fairness of his confession as a consular official could have verified the status of Mr. Fierro’s family in Mexico, thus mitigating the impact that their detention might have had on his interrogation and subsequent confession. 

The Commission also responded to the State’s argument that the Commission should not be hearing the case because it duplicated the Avena Case in the International Court of Justice which addressed the claims of Mexican nationals denied consular assistance, including Mr. Fierro.  The Commission rejected the duplication claim finding that the case before them did not involve the same parties, that the proceedings did not raise the same legal claims and guarantees at issue in the Avena Case. The recommendations to the United States were that the State provide the petitioner with an effective remedy which includes a re-trial in accordance with due process and fair trial protections or release if a fair re-trial is not possible, and to review its laws and procedures to ensure that the consular and due process rights of foreign nationals are respected.  The Commission also reiterated its request that the State take the necessary measures to preserve Mr. Fierro’s life pending the completion of these proceedings.