ÿWPCƒ FG%é4½e?HÛηÞôe³Ò‰„éz=y®8‘ù]*3¶¹]Fqœ2”p=“)T-LúúnþQ«žñ·g“ŸÎˆãH 8 š1ˆA¸!t>öú´!Z»áõ+œ;/ÇßcZ]"iV¸‚GžÍ Epå8wv ¡ c<,ýÞÃ}ÑØ¿JIÚVU)døtÁŠ×tó!'3c‘œÜå0Îÿ!¸D§C솉f¤d$³šê–” l,Î o‰,ä‘]€s³~ÂiœÁeS"ÁѦ_£í¶nåmË©Ñ*'aLŽ·!ñï%èy(ù\Y%¯OM‘òå?âUð×gIy‰&VcŠƒd/+꼩ÈÍ«µ\J¯ãCã›rަŒOê€a,- ¤þ/¢ÏëÜúñŸš]¦„_¹ƒ \!”×–¡NKP²žÚj¢ªÚK%vëž ØÕÙJ˜ÞñàOU«ù‹ës£‘ ŸA¤+}·ÚÓóª&y÷ðܼ™Ûj~*öšÙëy|kÉdyZëù7ÑIc˜>ô½ó>Œé¹µÏÎ=Œ%ûŽø§ßÞ}[â‹6é5jý𻓌÷Gá*ضߥÆvö{VWÙÄy+$V@ ÂMU>z̸ 0µ„ 0<9 0Yu 0_Î 0i- 0P–Ææ 0ᬠ0( D+µ AMà - 0Æ= #Á UNÄ %M(ND^ FwR4Vj mlô\  `‹&Times New Roman' Graciela Ato del Avellanal v. Peru, Communication No. 202/1986 (28 October 1988), U.N. Doc4tober 1988), U.N. Doc"Angie Dituri"0Angie Dituri .   6F , ÿÿ4Heading 3Ô S ÔÓ p^SÓÔ€£££Ôò òÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€XXXÔó óÓ p^SÓ<ÿÿ:Default Para6ÿÿ4HyperlinkóóòòÔ ÿ ÔóóÔ  Ô<ÿÿ:FollowedHypeóóòòÔ  ÔóóÔ  Ô< ÿÿ:Normal (Web)Ô S ÔÓ =jSÓÓ =jSÓ0ÿÿ.Strongò òÔ  Ôó óÔ  Ô Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(¹2ŸJ$££Ý ƒ5æ!ÝÒܰÒÒܰÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XpXXXÔÔ€XpXXXpÔÔÔÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$’’'dxd A<< cÿÿ#|x(ž5æ$¡¡ÒܰÒÒܰÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€Xq_XXXÔÔ€Xq_XXXq_ÔÔÔ˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularXúƒú* Äpì*´ëÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ5æ!ÝÒܰÒÒܰÒÔ..ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XpXXXÔÔ€XpXXXpÔÔÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òHUMAN€RIGHTS€COMMITTEEÐ ° ÐÌòòÔ_ÔAvellanalÔ_Ô€Ô_Ôv.Ô_Ô€PeruóóÐ |Ì ÐÌCommunication€No.€202/1986Ð H˜ ÐÌ28€October€1988Ð  d ÐÌÌVIEWSó óÐ Æ   ÐÌÌòòòòSubmitted€by:óó€Ô_ÔGracielaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAtoÔ_Ô€del€Ô_ÔAvellanalÔ_ÔÐ xÈ  ÐÌòòAlleged€victim:óó€The€authorÐ D”  ÐÌòòState€party€concerned:óó€PeruÐ ` ÐÌòòDate€of€communication:óó€13€January€1986€(date€of€initial€letter)Ð Ü, ÐÌòòDate€of€decision€on€admissibility:€óó9€July€1987óóÐ ¨ø ÐÌÌòòÓ  ÓThe€Human€Rights€Committee,€óóestablished€under€article€28€of€the€International€CovenantÐ Zª Ðon€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð @ ÐÌòòMeeting€óóon€28€October€1988,Ð  \ ÐÌòòHaving€concluded€óóits€consideration€of€communication€No.€202/1986,€submitted€Ô_ÔtcÔ_Ô€theÐ Ø( ÐCommittee€by€Ô_ÔGracielaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAtoÔ_Ô€del€Ô_ÔAvellanalÔ_Ô€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€InternationalÐ ¾ ÐCovenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð ¤ô ÐÌòòHaving€taken€into€account€óóall€written€information€made€available€to€it€by€the€author€of€theÐ p!À  Ðcommunication€and€by€the€State€party€concerned,Ð V"¦! ÐÌòòAdopts€óóthe€following:Ð "$r# ÐÌÌòòÓ  Óò òViews€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€Optional€Protocolóóó óÐ Ô&$"& ÐÓÓÌÌ1.€The€author€of€the€communication€(initial€letter€dated€13€January€1986€and€a€subsequentÐ †)Ö$) Ðletter€dated€11€February€1987)€is€Ô_ÔGracielaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAtoÔ_Ô€del€Ô_ÔAvellanalÔ_Ô,€a€Peruvian€citizen€born€inÐ l*¼%* Ð1934,€employed€as€professor€of€music€and€married€to€Guillermo€Ô_ÔBurneoÔ_Ô,€currently€residingÐ R+¢&+ Ðin€Peru.€She€is€represented€by€counsel.€It€is€claimed€that€the€Government€of€Peru€has€violatedÐ 8,ˆ', Ðarticles€2,€paragraphs€1€and€3,€16,€23,€paragraphs€4€and€26,€of€the€Covenant,€because€theÐ -n(- Ðauthor€has€been€allegedly€discriminated€against€only€because€she€is€a€woman.Ð ° ÐÌ2.1€The€author€is€the€owner€of€two€apartment€buildings€in€Lima,€which€she€acquired€in€1974.Ð |Ì ÐIt€appears€that€a€number€of€tenants€took€advantage€of€the€change€in€ownership€to€ceaseÐ b² Ðpaying€rent€for€their€apartments.€After€unsuccessful€attempts€to€collect€the€overdue€rent,€theÐ H˜ Ðauthor€sued€the€tenants€on€13€September€1978.€The€court€of€first€instance€found€in€her€Ô_ÔfavourÔ_ÔÐ . ~ Ðand€ordered€the€tenants€to€pay€her€the€rent€due€since€1974.€The€Superior€Court€reversed€theÐ  d Ðjudgement€on€21€November€1980€on€the€procedural€ground€that€the€author€was€not€entitledÐ ú J Ðto€sue,€because,€according€to€article€168€of€the€Peruvian€Civil€Code,€when€a€woman€isÐ à 0 Ðmarried€only€the€husband€is€entitled€to€represent€matrimonial€property€before€the€Courts€("ElÐ Æ   ÐÔ_ÔmaridoÔ_Ô€es€el€Ô_ÔrepresentanteÔ_Ô€de€la€Ô_ÔsociedadÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔconyugalÔ_Ô").€On€10€December€1980€the€authorÐ ¬ ü  Ðappealed€to€the€Peruvian€Supreme€Court,€submitting,€òòinter€alia,€óóthat€the€PeruvianÐ ’â  ÐConstitution€now€in€force€abolished€discrimination€against€women€and€that€article€2€(2)€ofÐ xÈ  Ðthe€Peruvian€Magna€Carta€provides€that€"the€law€grants€rights€to€women€which€are€not€lessÐ ^®  Ðthan€those€granted€to€men".€However,€on€15€February€1984€the€Supreme€Court€upheld€theÐ D”  Ðdecision€of€the€Superior€Court.€Thereupon,€the€author€interposed€the€recourse€of€òòÔ_ÔamparoÔ_Ô€óóonÐ *z  Ð6€May€1984,€claiming€that€in€her€case€article€2€(2)€of€the€Constitution€had€been€violated€byÐ ` Ðdenying€her€the€right€to€litigate€before€the€courts€only€because€she€is€a€woman.€The€SupremeÐ öF ÐCourt€rejected€he€recourse€of€òòÔ_ÔamparoÔ_Ô€óóon€10€April€1985.Ð Ü, ÐÌ2.2€Having€thus€exhausted€domestic€remedies€in€Peru,€and€pursuant€to€article€39€of€theÐ ¨ø ÐPeruvian€Law€No.€23506,€which€specifically€provides€that€a€Peruvian€citizen€who€considersÐ ŽÞ Ðthat€his€or€her€constitutional€rights€have€been€violated€may€appeal€to€the€Human€RightsÐ tÄ ÐCommittee€of€the€United€Nations,€the€author€seeks€United€Nations€assistance€in€vindicatingÐ Zª Ðher€right€to€equality€before€the€Peruvian€courts.Ð @ ÐÌ3.€By€its€decision€of€19€March€1986,€the€Working€Group€of€the€Human€Rights€CommitteeÐ  \ Ðtransmitted€the€communication€under€rule€91€of€the€provisional€rules€of€procedure€to€theÐ òB ÐState€party€concerned,€requesting€information€and€observations€relevant€to€the€question€ofÐ Ø( Ðthe€admissibility€of€the€communication€in€so€far€as€it€may€raise€issues€under€articles€14,Ð ¾ Ðparagraph€1,€16€and€26€in€conjunction€with€articles€2€and€3€of€the€Covenant.€The€WorkingÐ ¤ô ÐGroup€also€requested€the€State€party€to€provide€the€Committee€with€(a)€the€text€of€theÐ Š Ú Ðdecision€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€10€April€1985,€(b)€any€other€relevant€court€orders€orÐ p!À  Ðdecisions€not€already€provided€by€the€author,€and€(c)€the€text€of€the€relevant€provisions€ofÐ V"¦! Ðthe€domestic€aw,€including€those€of€the€Peruvian€Civil€Code€and€Constitution.Ð <#Œ" ÐÌ4.1€By€its€submission€dated€20€November€1986€the€State€party€noted€that€"in€the€sectionÐ %X $ Ðbrought€by€Mrs.€Ô_ÔGracielaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAtoÔ_Ô€del€Ô_ÔAvellanalÔ_Ô€and€one€other,€the€decision€of€he€Supreme€CourtÐ î%>!% Ðdated€10€April€1985€was€deemed€accepted,€since€no€appeal€was€made€against€it€under€articleÐ Ô&$"& Ð42€of€Act€No.€23385".Ð º' #' ÐÌ4.2€The€annexed€decision€of€the€Supreme€Court,€dated€10€April€1985,€"declares€valid€theÐ †)Ö$) Ðruling€set€out€on€12€sheets,€dated€24€July€1984,€declaring€inadmissible€he€application€forÐ l*¼%* ÐòòÔ_ÔamparoÔ_Ô€óósubmitted€on€2€sheets€by€Mrs.€Ô_ÔGracielaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔAtoÔ_Ô€del€Ô_ÔAvellanalÔ_Ô€de€Ô_ÔBurneoÔ_Ô€and€one€otherÐ R+¢&+ Ðagainst€the€First€Civil€Section€of€the€Supreme€Court;€[and]€orders€that€the€present€decision,Ð 8,ˆ', Ðwhether€accepted€or€enforceable,€be€published€in€the€òòÔ_ÔDiarioÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔOficialÔ_Ô,€El€Ô_ÔPeruanoÔ_Ô€óówithin€theÐ -n(- ÐÔ_Ôtime„limit€laid€down€in€article€41€of€Law€No.€23156".Ð ° ÐÌ5.1€Commenting€on€the€State€party's€submission€under€rule€91,€the€author,€in€a€submissionÐ |Ì Ðdated€11€February€1987€contends€that:Ð b² ÐÌ"1.€It€is€untrue€that€the€ruling€of€10€April€1985,€of€which€I€was€notified€on€5€August€1985,Ð . ~ Ðwas€accepted.€As€shown€by€the€attached€copy€of€the€original€application,€my€attorneysÐ  d Ðappealed€against€the€decision€in€the€petition€of€6€August€1985,€which€was€stamped€asÐ ú J Ðreceived€by€the€Second€Civil€Section€of€the€Supreme€Court€on€7„August€1985.Ð à 0 ÐÌ"2.€The€Supreme€Court€has€never€notified€my€attorneys€of€the€decision€which€it€had€handedÐ ¬ ü  Ðdown€on€the€appeal€of€6€August€1985".Ð ’â  ÐÌ5.2€The€author€also€encloses€a€copy€of€a€further€application,€stamped€as€received€by€theÐ ^®  ÐSecond€Civil€Section€of€the€Supreme€Court€on€3€October€1985€and€reiterating€the€requestÐ D”  Ðthat€the€appeal€lodged€should€be€upheld.€She€adds€that€"once€again,€the€Supreme€Court€failedÐ *z  Ðto€notify€my€attorneys€of€the€decision€which€it€had€handed€down€on€this€further€petition".Ð ` ÐÌ6.1€Before€considering€any€claims€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Human€RightsÐ Ü, ÐCommittee€must,€in€accordance€with€rule€87€of€its€provisional€rules€of€procedure,€decideÐ Â Ðwhether€or€not€it€is€admissible€under€the€Optional€Protocol€to€the€CovenantÐ ¨ø ÐÌ6.2€With€regard€to€article€5,€paragraph€2€(a)€of€the€Optional€Protocol,€the€CommitteeÐ tÄ Ðobserved€that€the€matter€complained€of€by€the€author€was€not€being€examined€and€had€notÐ Zª Ðbeen€examined€under€another€procedure€of€international€investigation€or€settlement.Ð @ ÐÌ6.3€With€regard€to€article€5,€paragraph€2€(b),€of€the€Optional€Protocol,€the€Committee€notedÐ  \ Ðthe€State€party's€contention€that€the€author€has€failed€to€appeal€the€decision€of€the€PeruvianÐ òB ÐSupreme€Court€of€10€April€1985.€However,€in€the€light€of€the€author's€submission€of€11Ð Ø( ÐFebruary€1987€the€Committee€found€that€the€communication€satisfied€the€requirements€ofÐ ¾ Ðarticle€5,€paragraph€2€(b)€of€the€Optional€Protocol.€The€Committee€further€observed€that€thisÐ ¤ô Ðissue€could€be€reviewed€in€the€light€of€any€further€explanations€or€statements€received€fromÐ Š Ú Ðthe€State€party€under€article€4,€paragraph€2,€of€the€Optional€Protocol.Ð p!À  ÐÌ7.€On€9€July€1987€the€Human€Rights€Committee€therefore€decided€that€the€communicationÐ <#Œ" Ðwas€admissible,€in€so€far€as€it€raised€issues€under€articles€14,€paragraph€1,€and€16€inÐ "$r# Ðconjunction€with€articles€2,€3€and€26€of€the€Covenant.Ð %X $ ÐÌ8.€The€time„limit€for€the€State€party's€submission€under€article€4,€paragraph€2,€of€theÐ Ô&$"& ÐOptional€Protocol€expired€on€6€February€1988.€No€submission€has€been€received€from€theÐ º' #' ÐState€party,€despite€a€reminder€sent€to€the€State€party€on€17€May€1988.Ð  (ð#( ÐÌ9.1€The€Human€Rights€Committee,€having€considered€the€present€communication€in€the€lightÐ l*¼%* Ðof€all€the€information€made€available€to€it,€as€provided€in€article€5,€paragraph€1,€of€theÐ R+¢&+ ÐOptional€Protocol,€notes€that€the€facts€of€the€case,€as€submitted€by€the€author,€have€not€beenÐ 8,ˆ', Ðcontested€by€the€State€party.Ð -n(- Ї9.2€In€formulating€its€views,€the€Committee€takes€into€account€the€failure€of€the€State€partyÐ ° Ðto€furnish€certain€information€and€clarifications,€in€particular€with€regard€to€the€allegationsÐ –æ Ðof€discrimination€of€which€the€author€has€complained.€It€is€not€sufficient€to€forward€the€textÐ |Ì Ðof€the€relevant€laws€and€decisions,€without€specifically€addressing€the€issues€raised€in€theÐ b² Ðcommunication.€It€is€implicit€in€article€4,€paragraph€2,€of€the€Optional€Protocol€that€the€StateÐ H˜ Ðparty€has€the€duty€to€investigate€in€good€faith€all€allegations€of€violation€of€the€CovenantÐ . ~ Ðmade€against€it€and€its€authorities,€and€to€furnish€to€the€Committee€all€relevant€information.Ð  d ÐIn€the€circumstances,€due€weight€must€be€given€to€the€author's€allegations.Ð ú J ÐÌ10.1€With€respect€to€the€requirement€set€forth€in€article€14,€paragraph€1,€of€the€Covenant€thatÐ Æ   Ð"all€persons€shall€be€equal€before€the€courts€and€tribunals",€the€Committee€notes€that€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðcourt€of€first€instance€decided€in€favour€of€the€author,€but€the€Superior€Court€reversed€thatÐ ’â  Ðdecision€on€the€sole€ground€that€according€to€article€168€of€the€Peruvian€Civil€Code€only€theÐ xÈ  Ðhusband€is€entitled€to€represent€matrimonial€property,€i.e.€that€the€wife€was€not€equal€to€herÐ ^®  Ðhusband€for€purposes€of€suing€in€Court.Ð D”  ÐÌ10.2€With€regard€to€discrimination€on€the€ground€of€sex€the€Committee€notes€further€thatÐ ` Ðunder€article€3€of€the€Covenant€State€parties€undertake€"to€ensure€the€equal€right€of€men€andÐ öF Ðwomen€to€the€enjoyment€of€all€civil€and€political€rights€set€forth€in€the€present€Covenant"Ð Ü, Ðand€that€article€26€provides€that€all€persons€are€equal€before€the€law€and€are€entitled€to€theÐ Â Ðequal€protection€of€the€law.€The€Committee€finds€that€the€facts€before€it€reveal€that€theÐ ¨ø Ðapplication€of€article€168€of€the€Peruvian€Civil€Code€to€the€author€resulted€in€denying€herÐ ŽÞ Ðequality€before€the€courts€and€constituted€discrimination€on€the€ground€of€sex.Ð tÄ ÐÌ11.€The€Human€Rights€Committee,€acting€under€article€5,€paragraph€4,€of€the€optionalÐ @ ÐProtocol€to€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,€is€of€the€view€that€theÐ &v Ðevents€of€this€case,€in€so€far€as€they€continued€or€occurred€after€3€January€1981€(the€date€ofÐ  \ Ðentry€into€force€of€the€Optional€Protocol€for€Peru),€disclose€violations€of€articles€3,€14,Ð òB Ðparagraph€1€and€26€of€the€Covenant.Ð Ø( ÐÌ12.€The€Committee,€accordingly,€is€of€the€view€that€the€State€party€is€under€an€obligation,Ð ¤ô Ðin€accordance€with€the€provisions€of€article€2€of€the€Covenant,€to€take€effective€measures€toÐ Š Ú Ðremedy€the€violations€suffered€by€the€victim.€In€this€connection€the€Committee€welcomesÐ p!À  Ðthe€State€party's€commitment,€expressed€in€articles€39€and€40€of€Law€No.€23506,€to€co„Ð V"¦! Ðoperate€with€the€Human€Rights€Committee,€and€to€implement€its€recommendations.