BOLIVIA

Title:
Margarita Maruza Ferrufino Vargas (on behalf of her son, I.A.F.) v. Elia Tellez Rivero

Court:
District Court of Cochabamba

Date:
19 November 2010

CRC Provisions:
Article 37: Torture and deprivation of liberty

Other International Provisions:
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 5
American Convention on Human Rights, Article 29

Domestic Provisions:
Children and Youth Act, Articles 234, 238
Bolivian Constitution, Articles 13 and 256

Case Summary:
Background:
15-year-old I.A.F. was accused of sexually abusing a young child. Throughout the investigation of the alleged crime, the police searched I.A.F.'s residence several times with the objective of bringing him in for questioning. Each time, I.A.F.'s relatives denied that he was home and refused to provide any information on his whereabouts. The police requested and obtained an order to detain I.A.F., and he was eventually captured and incarcerated.

Issue and resolution:
Juvenile justice; detention. The District Court determined that the lower court had violated I.A.F.'s constitutional rights by ordering his incarceration, and requested that I.A.F. be immediately released from prison and sent to the police for questioning.

Court reasoning:
The order to detain I.A.F. was limited in scope and should have served only to compel him to submit to questioning by law enforcement. His incarceration upon being apprehended was thus unlawful and a violation of his constitutional rights. Moreover, the Court noted that I.A.F.'s period in detention had also had a severe negative impact on him in depriving him of contact with his family, friends and other persons in the community.

Excerpts citing CRC and other relevant human rights instruments:
as in full-text Spanish decision:
I.1.1. Hechos que motivan el recurso

El Código Niño, Niña y Adolescente de manera clara y taxativa señala que sus preceptos son de orden público y de aplicación preferente, que deben interpretarse velando el interés superior del menor de acuerdo con las garantías constitucionales y tratados internacionales, que el presunto infractor no puede ser privado de su libertad sino es mediante proceso; postulados que fueron recogidos e interpretados por el referido Código y que garantizan el debido proceso en un sistema de administración de justicia de protección al menor, en el que estos deben ser tratados con respeto y consideración y principalmente cumpliendo estrictamente los plazos procesales.
…
III.1. Consideraciones sobre la aplicación de la Constitución Política del Estado

Como este recurso, ahora acción, fue presentado y resuelto por el Tribunal de hábeas corpus en vigencia de la Ley Fundamental abrogada, es pertinente determinar, antes de analizar la Resolución venida en revisión, qué norma constitucional se aplicará.

En ese sentido, conforme a los fundamentos desarrollados en la SC 0006/2010-R de 6 de abril, partiendo del principio pro hómine, contenido en los arts. 5 del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos (PIDCP); 29 de la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos; 13.IV y 256 de la Constitución Política del Estado vigente (CPE), el juzgador debe aplicar aquellas normas que resulten más favorables para la persona, su libertad y derechos, así como interpretar esas normas en sentido más amplio.
…
El CNNA en sus arts. 5 y 6 establece que los niños, niñas o adolescentes, como sujetos de derecho, gozan de todos los derechos fundamentales y garantías constitucionales inherentes a su persona, sin perjuicio de la protección integral que instituye ese Código, cuyas normas deben interpretarse velando por el interés superior del niño, niña y adolescente, de acuerdo con la Constitución, las Convenciones, Tratados Internacionales vigentes y las leyes del Estado. Los arts. 214 y 215 del CNNA, en concordancia con los anteriores señalan que el Estado les garantiza el acceso a la justicia en igualdad de condiciones, en todas sus instancias, y al debido proceso, en cuya tramitación serán tratados con el respeto y consideración que se merecen como personas, sujetos de derechos, debiendo prevalecer en todas las actuaciones, investigaciones técnicas, periciales, el interés superior de los mismos.

Dentro de la teoría de la protección integral de la niñez los niños y adolescentes son considerados sujetos de derecho progresivo, lo que significa que conforme al paso del tiempo en relación a su desarrollo asumen progresivamente sus derechos y obligaciones, en ese contexto es que las normas del Código del Niño, Niña y Adolescente hacen especial énfasis en garantizar un proceso justo y respetuoso de los derechos del infractor y el de propender a su resocialización.

En ese sentido la Convención de Naciones Unidas Sobre los Derechos del Niño, de 20 de noviembre de 1989, que para sus efectos entiende por niño todo ser humano menor de dieciocho años de edad, cuyo art. 37 incs. b) y d) señala que ningún niño será privado de su libertad ilegal o arbitrariamente y que su detención, encarcelamiento o prisión se llevará a cabo conforme a ley, como medida de último recurso y durante el período más breve que proceda; asistiéndole además en estos casos, derecho a un pronto acceso a la asistencia jurídica y a otra asistencia adecuada, a impugnar la legalidad de su privación de libertad ante tribunal o autoridad competente, independiente e imparcial y a una pronta decisión sobre dicha acción.

CRIN English translation:
I.1.1. Grounds for the appeal

The Children and Youth Act clearly and precisely states that its provisions relate to public order; enjoy preferential applicability; must be interpreted in light of the best interests of the child, in accordance with constitutional guarantees and international treaties; and that an alleged offender cannot be deprived of his liberty except by means of a trial. These principles were assembled and interpreted by the aforementioned Act to guarantee due process in the child protection justice system, in which children must be treated with respect and consideration and, most importantly, in strict compliance with procedural deadlines.
…
III.1. Considerations regarding the application of the Political Constitution of the State

As this appeal, now an action at law, was presented and resolved by the habeas corpus Tribunal in accordance with the Basic Law which has now been repealed, it is pertinent to determine which constitutional rules shall be applied, before analysing the Resolution under review.

In that sense, according to the principles developed in SC 0006/2010-R of April 6, based on the pro homine principle contained in Article 5 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 29 of the American Convention on Human Rights, as well as Articles 13.IV and 256 of the Political Constitution of the State (PCS) currently in force, the court must apply those rules that are most favorable to the individual, their freedom and rights, as well as interpreting these rules in the broadest possible sense.
…
Articles 5 and 6 of the Children and Youth Act state that children and adolescents, as individuals subject to the law, enjoy all their inherent fundamental rights and constitutional guarantees, without prejudice to the comprehensive protection that Act provides. The provisions of this Act must be interpreted in light of the best interests of the child, in accordance with the Constitution, conventions, international treaties in force and national laws. Articles 214 and 215, in accordance with the aforementioned Articles of the same Act, provide that the state guarantees children access to justice on an equal footing, in all instances, as well as due process during which they shall be treated with the respect and consideration they deserve as individuals subject to the law. In addition, the best interests of the child should prevail in all proceedings, technical investigations and expert assessments.

Within the theory of comprehensive child protection, children and adolescents are considered to be progressive legal subjects, which means that as time passes in relation to their development, they gradually assume their rights and obligations. It is in this context that the aforementioned Act places great emphasis on guaranteeing fair proceedings which respect the offender’s rights and seek their social rehabilitation.

In this sense, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of November 20, 1989 (which defines a child as any human being under the age of eighteen) provides in Article 37, subsections b) and d), that no child shall be deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that their arrest, detention or imprisonment shall be carried out according to law, as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period. Children should also be assisted in these cases by the right to gain prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance; to challenge the legality of their detention before a court or other competent authority, which is independent and impartial; and to a prompt decision regarding any such action.

CRIN Comments:
CRIN believes this decision is consistent with the CRC. As recognised by the Court, Article 37 of the Convention makes clear that children should only be detained as a matter of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time. As such, States should make every effort not to detain children accused of being in conflict with the law during the investigation process.

Citation:
Constitutional resolution 2008-18265-37-RHC, File No.: 2365/2010-R

Link to Full Judgment:
http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/gpwtc.php?name=consultas&file=print&palabra=&id=21558

This case summary is provided by the Child Rights International Network for educational and informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.

0