Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Yüklə 0,88 Mb.
|
B) Pecuniary Damage213. According to the Court’s case law, pecuniary damage entails the loss or impairment of the victims’ income, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts and the monetary consequences thereof bearing a causal link to the facts of the instant case; for this purpose, if appropriate, the Court will set a damages amount intended to provide compensation for the monies and personal effects lost as a result of the violations declared to be such in the relevant Judgment.164 Based on what was said regarding the payment of certain amounts to the legal heirs of the ten victims that were executed or caused to disappear (supra paras. 207 to 210), in this separate heading the Court will merely set compensation for pecuniary damage on account of the monies and personal effects lost by the next of kin and bearing a causal link to the facts of the case, considering the circumstances of the case, the evidence offered, the case law of the Court and the parties’ arguments. 214. Moreover, at least four of the next of kin of the victims have seen their main regular activity as of the date of the facts interrupted, as they put all their efforts into their quest for justice for the case at hand, which caused them to incur expenses. Thus, Ms. Andrea Gisela Ortiz-Perea stated that she quit her university studies; Ms. Antonia Pérez-Velásquez stated that she quit her job as an elementary school teacher; Ms. Alejandrina Raida Cóndor-Saez stated that she quit working as a clothes launderer; and Ms. Dina Flormelania Pablo-Mateo said she quit her job at the market. In view of said circumstances, the Court considers it appropriate to order that the State pay, in fairness, compensation in the amount of US $20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States Dollars) to each of Ms. Alejandrina Raida Cóndor-Saez and Ms. Dina Flormelania Pablo-Mateo, and US $25,000.00 (twenty-five thousand United States Dollars) to each of Ms. Andrea Gisela Ortiz-Perea and Ms. Antonia Pérez-Velásquez. 215. Also, the Court has taken due account of the fact that, in the instant case, some of the next of kin of the disappeared or executed persons have incurred expenses in their quest for justice. Such next of kin are as follows: Rosario Muñoz-Sánchez, Fedor Muñoz-Sánchez, Hilario Jaime Amaro-Ancco, Magna Rosa Perea de Ortiz, Víctor Andrés Ortiz-Torres, José Ariol Teodoro-León, Bertila Bravo-Trujillo, and José Esteban Oyague-Velazco. Therefore, the Court considers it appropriate to order that the State pay, in fairness, compensation in the amount of US $5,000.00 (five thousand United States Dollars) to each of the above-named persons. C) Non Pecuniary Damage 216. Non pecuniary damage may cover both the suffering and distress caused to the direct victim and the victim’s relatives, the impairment of values of major personal significance, and the non pecuniary changes to the victim’s or the victim’s family’s living conditions. Since accurately quantifying non pecuniary damage is impossible, such damage can only be compensated, for the purpose of providing comprehensive reparation to the victim, through the payment of such sum of money or the provision of such goods or services of monetary worth as may be determined by the Court, in fairness and at its reasonable judicial discretion, and through public action or works aimed at giving recognition to the victim’s human dignity and preventing any further human rights violations.165 The former aspect of reparation of non pecuniary damage will be analyzed in this section, whereas the latter aspect will be addressed in section D) of this chapter. 217. As held by the Court in previous cases,166 the non pecuniary damage caused to Hugo Muñoz-Sánchez, Dora Oyague-Fierro, Marcelino Rosales-Cárdenas, Bertila Lozano-Torres, Luis Enrique Ortiz-Perea, Armando Richard Amaro-Cóndor, Robert Edgar Teodoro-Espinoza, Heráclides Pablo-Meza, Juan Gabriel Mariños-Figueroa, and Felipe Flores-Chipana is evident, as it is human nature for any person who is subjected to arbitrary detention, forced disappearance or extra-legal execution to experience deep suffering, distress, terror, impotence and insecurity, which is why no proof of such damage is required. As noted above (supra para. 210), the Court considers that the State has already provided compensation for such damage, in connection with the civil damages awarded to the ten victims that were executed or caused to disappear. 218. As regards the next of kin of the ten victims that were executed or caused to disappear, the Court insists that the suffering caused to the victim “extends to the closest members of the family, particularly those who were in close affective contact with the victim.”167 Furthermore, the Court has found that a person’s suffering or death – in this case, the forced disappearance and extra-legal execution – cause non pecuniary damage to that person’s daughters, sons, spouse or common-law spouse, and mother and father, which is why no proof is required in this regard.168 219. International courts have repeatedly held that a judgment is, in and of itself, a form of redress.169 The Court does, however, consider it necessary to order, in fairness,170 payment of the following sums as compensation for non pecuniary damage on account of the suffering of the next of kin of the ten victims that were caused to disappear or executed, such next of kin being in turn victims of the breach of the right to humane treatment (supra para. 129):
220. Based on the foregoing, the compensation set by the Court is as follows:
Yüklə 0,88 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||