During the 176 ordinary session, which will be held in Guatemala, the Inter -American Court of Human Rights (IDH Court) will hold five private hearings to supervise compliance with sentence in the same number of cases against the Guatemalan State.
During the day from May 19 to 23, the IDH Court will hold three public hearings for funds, five private hearings for cases of Guatemala in the stage of supervision of compliance with sentence, an academic seminar open to the public and some meetings with national authorities.
These cases, according to the Court, address different structural problems linked to access to justice, the rights of indigenous peoples, the right to health, the protection of people in vulnerability and integral reparation to the victims.
What they supervise
Once a sentence is issued, the Court continues its work by supervising that the State complies with the ordered repairs. This may include compensation, non -repetition measures, public acts for recognition of responsibility, legal or institutional reforms, among others. This supervision is maintained until the State fully complies with the provisions.
The Court is composed of seven independent judges and judges, elected in a personal capacity by the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS). His mandate is six years, renewable only once. The judges and judges must be people of high moral authority, recognized competence in human rights, and cannot perform functions that compromise their impartiality or independence.
The cases
- Case Rodríguez Revolorio
The case dates back to May 23, 1996, when a court ordered Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Revolorio, Miguel Ángel López Calo and Aníbal Archila Pérez, for murder. The three were agents of the National Police when the events occurred. The judges at the time considered that penalty based on the criterion that the circumstances of the fact, the occasion, the way and the determining mobiles revealed a greater particular danger of the agent.
Archila Pérez, López Calo and Rodríguez Revolorio starred in the AutoPatrulla 603 case, for the murder of Luis Pedro Choc Reyna and attempted murder of Edgar Estuardo Motta González.
Both victims were intercepted when they left a bar in zone 6. The agents took them on the 603 highway to a vacant lot in zone 16, where they were beaten and fired, believing that the two had died, but Motta González survived and became a witness.
The inmates raised legal resources and were dismissed. Some time later, Archila died in prison, on July 16, 1999. Later, in 2012, the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) modified the conviction and imposed 50 years to Rodríguez Revolorio and López Calo, who left prison in 2016 for good conduct and work.
The IDH Court considered Guatemala for the violation of the American Convention for the imposition of the death penalty and that the use of the “Agent Danger” criteria is incompatible with the principle of legality of the American Convention on Human Rights.
The Court declared in 2019 the international responsibility of Guatemala for imposing the death penalty without due guarantees, the inhuman conditions of detention and the lack of effective appeal for Mr. Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Revolorio, Miguel Ángel López Calo and Aníbal Archila Pérez. In 2024 and 2025, the Court verified compliance with repair measures regarding the publication of the sentence and the payment of compensation.
María Inés Chinchilla Sandoval, a woman with physical disabilities, died in 2004 while she was deprived of liberty in a Guatemalan prison. During his arrest, according to the IdH Court, Chinchilla Sandoval did not receive adequate medical care, despite his delicate state of health, which constituted a violation of his rights to life, to personal integrity and health.
On the day of his death, having who moved her, fell from her wheelchair along a ladder. The Commission considered that Chinchilla Sandoval did not receive effective judicial protection.
The investigation undertaken by the State did not determine whether the established causes of his death occurred as a result of the lack of adequate medical care and the conditions of detention, so that to date the various types of responsibilities that could have arisen for such fact have not been established.
The Inter -American Court of Human Rights concluded that the Guatemalan State did not guarantee detention conditions compatible with human dignity or provided the necessary medical care, in a context of discrimination due to disability reasons.
In its 2016 judgment, the Court ordered the State to implement various reparation measures, including the payment of compensation to the children of Chinchilla Sandoval and the publication of the sentence. By 2023, Guatemala had complied with the main measures ordered by the Court.
- Outside of the judicial agency
In this case, 65 extraBajadores of the Judicial Agency of Guatemala were fired after participating in a strike in 1995 that was declared illegal, in which they claimed better working and salary conditions. The Inter -American Court of Human Rights determined that the Guatemalan State violated labor rights, due process and freedom of the employed workers. He concluded that the dismissals were arbitrary and that the State did not provide effective judicial resources to challenge decisions.
In its 2021 judgment, the Court ordered the State to implement reparation measures, including the publication of the sentence and its official summary. In 2023, the total compliance of these measures by the Guatemalan State was verified.
This case involves 49 people who lived with HIV between 1992 and 2004 in Guatemala and who did not receive adequate medical care from the State. The Inter -American Court of Human Rights concluded that the Guatemalan State violated health rights, to life and the personal integrity of the victims, not providing them with timely and adequate medical treatment. He also noted that the State did not take effective measures to prevent discrimination and stigma associated with HIV.
In its 2018 judgment, the Court ordered the State to implement various reparation measures, including the payment of compensation and reintegrates to the victims, as well as the publication of the sentence. By 2022, the payment of compensation and reintegrates had partially complied with, and totally with the publication of the sentence.
Among the other resolutive points to be met are: to provide psychosocial medical care for free, to guarantee, through health institutions, that medical care is granted in the clinic closest to the place of residence of the victims, assuming transfer costs.
Also, implement mechanisms for control and supervision of health services, improve the accessibility, availability and quality of health benefits for people living with HIV.
- Indigenous peoples Maya Kaqchikel de Sumpango
This case, according to the Court, focuses on the impossibility of four Guatemalan indigenous communities (Maya Kaqchikel in Sumpango, Maya Achí de San Miguel Chicaj, Maya Mam de Cajolá and Maya Mam of Todos Santos Cuchumatán) to freely exercise their right to freedom of expression and their cultural rights through its community radios.
The Inter -American Court of Human Rights determined in 2021 that the General Telecommunications Law of Guatemala, by establishing as the sole criterion of award of frequencies the greatest economic offer, indirectly discriminating against indigenous peoples, who, due to their situation of poverty and social exclusion, could not compete on equal terms.
The Court indicated that the Guatemalan State did not adopt affirmative measures to guarantee the access of indigenous peoples to the radio spectrum, and that there was a policy of criminalization of community broadcasting operated operated without authorization, which resulted in the criminal prosecution of members of indigenous communities and in raids of their community radios. In its 2021 judgment, the Court ordered the State to adapt its internal regulations to legally recognize indigenous community radios and guarantee their access to the radio spectrum.
At the time, the IdH Court, in a statement, said that “he found the State of Guatemala internationally responsible for the violation of the rights to freedom of expression, equality before the law and to participate in cultural life, to the detriment of indigenous peoples.