OPINION No. 21/2004 (COLOMBIA)
Communication addressed to the Government on 21 June 2004.
Concerning Mr. Israel Morales Hernández.
The State is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
1. (Same text as paragraph 1 of opinion No. 20/2004.)
2. The Working Group conveys its appreciation to the Government for having provided the
requested information in good time.
3. (Same text as paragraph 3 of opinion No. 20/2004.)
4. In the light of the allegations made, the Working Group welcomes the cooperation of the
Government. The Working Group transmitted the reply provided by the Government to the
source, but has not received any comments on it. The Working Group believes that it is in a
position to render an opinion on the facts and circumstances of the case, in the context of the
allegations made and the response of the Government thereto.
5. Mr. Israel Morales Hernández, a Colombian citizen, is currently detained in the Pereira
judicial district prison in the department of Risaralda. He was arrested on 6 October 1999 and
charged with attempted homicide and the illegal bearing of firearms for personal defence. His
case, No. 2000-0104-00, is before the single criminal court of the Guadalajara de Buga special
circuit.
6. The public hearing of the trial took place on 22 June 2001. According to the law, the
judge was required to deliver a judgement within the 15 days following the hearing, which he
failed to do. Thirteen months later, in July 2002, Mr. Morales Hernández filed a writ of
habeas corpus. On 9 August 2002, the writ of habeas corpus was rejected by the Pereira circuit
criminal court, which found that the court concerned had been unable to deliver a judgement
because of bottlenecks or a heavy workload.
7. On 19 November 2002, Mr. Morales Hernández applied for an injunction (acción de
tutela), or amparo, as provided for by article 86 of Colombia’s Constitution, to obtain protection
of his fundamental right to due process. On 13 December 2002, the case was heard by the high
court of the Guadalajara de Buga judicial district, which rejected the complainant’s application.
The Court argued that although the administration of justice had clearly been delayed, the delay
was fully justified.
8. On 14 March 2003, Mr. Morales Hernández exercised his right of petition to appeal to
the Ombudsman’s Office; this appeal was also rejected.
9. According to the source, Mr. Morales Hernández has been deprived of his liberty for
four years and eight months, without any decision having been taken on his legal status.
10. The source believes that the failure to comply with the procedural time limits has resulted
in an illegal prolongation of the deprivation of liberty of Mr. Morales Hernández for more than
four years, thus making his detention arbitrary.
11. The right to due process includes the right to judicial proceedings free of delays, the right
to be tried within a reasonable period of time and the right to receive a reasoned judgement
within a reasonable period of time. The Buga special circuit high court and the Pereira circuit
criminal court cited bottlenecks in the judicial system, a heavy workload and the priority given
to other decisions to excuse the failure to deliver a judgement. According to the source, that
does not excuse the excessive delay in delivering a judgement, because through such delay,
Mr. Morales Hernández has de facto been sentenced to a penalty of deprivation of liberty. In the
opinion of the source, that is totally at odds with the principle of the presumption of innocence.
The source concludes that the detention of Mr. Morales Hernández is arbitrary and calls upon the
Working Group to declare it as such.
12. In its reply, the Government confines itself to saying that, according to the
National Institute of Prisons and Penitentiaries (INPEC), the legal situation with regard to
Mr. Morales Hernández was as follows. Offence: attempted homicide with the use of a weapon.
Authority: Special court of Buga, Valle. Status: defendant. Date of arrest: 10 October 1999.
Date of incarceration in Pereira prison: 4 April 2002. The Government points out that it
requested information from the Office of the Attorney-General, which replied that, as the case
was sub judice, it could not provide any information on it.
13. The source has not replied, although the Government’s reply was transmitted to it
on 22 October 2004.
14. In its reply, the Government acknowledges the information provided by the source in its
original communication. Mr. Israel Morales Hernández was arrested on 10 October 1999, but
the court dealing with his case has yet to deliver a judgement. That a person should be deprived
of liberty for more than five years without trial is clearly an unacceptable delay that makes that
person’s detention unjust. The backlog of cases pending in the courts cannot be accepted as a
justification.
15. Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Colombia has
ratified, states the following: “3. Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be
brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and
shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release.�?
16. In the light of the foregoing, the Working Group renders the following opinion:
The deprivation of liberty of Mr. Israel Morales Hernández is arbitrary, being in
contravention of article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and falls within
category III of the categories applicable to the consideration of the cases submitted to the
Working Group.
17. Consequent upon the opinion rendered, the Working Group requests the Government to
take the necessary steps to remedy the situation and bring it into conformity with the standards
and principles set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Adopted on 23 November 2004