Catalina Botero: The invention of Rafael Correa makes the measures that he asks inadmissible
Ecuadornews:
Catalina Botero, of the Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights points out that the precautionary measures that could be requested by former President Rafael Correa in the coming days would be inadmissible. The changes in the regulations of the IACHR that Correa pushed forward now turn against him.
After so much attack to the Rapporteurship, to the Commission, how did you take the idea that Correa now ask the agency for help?
Former President Correa should thank all the people who opposed his war against the Inter-American Commission, his attempt to end the possibility of precautionary measures, his struggle to dissolve the competences of the Inter-American Commission and turn it into a training center; thanks to the fact that we resisted the attacks of Correa and his government; thanks to the fact that we were able to resist today the Inter-American Commission exists, it can issue precautionary measures, and that is why former President Correa can request them …
But finally Correa got the regulations reformed
Now, because of Correa’s war against the Commission, the Commission had to reform its regulations and the point of honor after they tried to put an end to the figure of precautionary measures, the point that the Commission could not resist is that it touched him increase the requirements to be able to grant a precautionary measure, and precisely because these requirements have been increased today the request of former President Correa is inadmissible, because with the requirements that the Commission had to increase, the requests that Correa is making at this moment are inadmissible; his own invention makes the measures become irrelevant …
So, it is likely that they will not be granted such measures …
If the Inter-American Commission obeys its own regulations, the reforms that the Commission had to make, as a result of the war that Rafael Correa did to it, are simply inadmissible.
And what are those requirements that Correa would not meet?
He has to prove that there is an urgent and irreparable violation of a fundamental right, that if it is not protected by the precautionary measure it cannot be repaired in any way, and that would not prove it.
Did Correa have so much power to have achieved reforms on the issue of precautionary measures?
Three years lasted what they called the strengthening process in a euphemistic way, which basically sought that the Commission could never dictate precautionary measures … No, it did not have the power to end the Rapporteurship, nor with the precautionary measures , but such was the insistence, the war, the force that they put to him to try to finish with the Inter-American System that did have an achievement, that was the reform of the regulation, hardening the requirements for the procedure for the precautionary measures …
Correa and who else?
Basically Correa, but behind Correa were Venezuela, Nicaragua, and managed to articulate a majority to harden the provenance of the measures, something that is not very drastic, but they prevent that Correa’s today can proceed.
You described Correa as a cynic, but asking for the measures is a right that attends him …
I believe that people have the right to due process, to the guarantees of international human rights law, but that does not mean they are not cynical. That is, the fact that they are cynical does not mean that one should restrict them in the exercise of their rights … When a person tries to destroy a system of human rights protection to govern at will and then rips his clothes and goes to that same system, there is a deep contradiction that cannot be qualified in a different way from that of cynicism, because in both cases it was tearing the garments, it says that it is acting in the name of a superior good…
Can the Commission’s decision be affected by what a petitioner of measures has said against him in the past?
No, by no means, that is inadmissible. I think that only authoritarian regimes do; a person like Correa, for example, like (the president of Venezuela, Nicolás) Maduro, or like (the president of Nicaragua, Daniel) Ortega, who take revenge on those who speak ill of them, of those who question it. I believe that the Inter-American System has to be, and I hope it is, and I am sure that it will be, absolutely objective in the study of the application; and if the application meets the procedural requirements, I think it should be protected. But the problem is that I think he does not keep it, and he does not keep it because they hardened …
In any case, Correa should be assured that he will have due process in the Inter-American System
There is no doubt about that. People who had to defend the Inter-American System from the attacks of Rafael Correa because he wanted to govern at will, affecting the rights of Ecuadorians, does not mean that we do not defend the right to Due process and all constitutional guarantees.
How do you see freedom of expression in Ecuador today?
I think there have been some important changes; the mere fact that the president is not every Saturday insulting and intimidating the media, the mere fact that the private sector that publicizes the media is not threatened, the mere fact that journalists can do investigations without the sword of Damocles of the Superintendence of Communication over … In fact, these days the Rapporteurship for Freedom of Expression raised recommendations for the reform of the Communication Law … That is a change, a turn of 180 During the Correa administration, the Office of the Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression was insulted and it was said that it should disappear, the Lenin Moreno government opens itself to the recommendations of the Rapporteurship …
What is not it means that all the comments are welcome. It seems to me that the important thing is that there is a dialogue and an opening to review everything; I think (for example) that the media lynching violates all inter-American standards, the prior censorship as it was described in that law, violates the inter-American system (…).
The only fact that this can be talked and think and it seems to be oxygenating. However, there were orders to repeal the entire law…
That law would have to be repealed, and the Superintendence of Communications should be abolished and that money should be invested in goods and services for the people of Ecuador, in hospitals, in schools, and not in organs of censorship …
There may be a government that decides not to use that instrument (legal) to punish its critics, but if you leave that instrument ‘alive’, can be used tomorrow by another government, and then the results we saw …
At regional level how is freedom of expression, are there changes as in Ecuador?
There are very serious problems, in Mexico, in Brazil, especially in the triple border; in Colombia, in the northern triangle, there are very serious problems of violence against journalists; The figures in those countries are figures from countries at war, the statistics are alarming.
There are areas completely silenced, where people do not know what is happening, there is a complete informational blackout, imposed in many cases by organized crime, and in others by organized crime colluded with the authorities …
Then there are other countries where the State itself is responsible for suppressing the possibilities of a plural, open deliberation, with real guarantees for the exercise of freedom of expression such as Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia …
And then who is responsible for protecting the exercise of journalism, the journalists?
To the State; it has the obligation to prevent violence against journalists, protect people at risk for exercising journalism and fight against impunity for such crimes, but also, the obligation to establish a system of guarantees to ensure the free exercise of freedom of expression, to ensure that people are not going to be imprisoned for criticizing power, to ensure that people are not going to lose all their assets for making criticism or investigative journalism …
Such was the insistence, the force that they put to try to end the Inter-American System, which did have an achievement, which was the reform of the regulation, tightening the requirements for the procedure for precautionary measures … “. (I)