Between February and September 1992, the State modified and reduced the pension regime that Mr. Carlos Torres Benvenuto, Mr. Javier Mujica Ruiz Huidobro, Mr. Guillermo Álvarez Hernández, Mr. Reymert Bartra Vásquez, and Mr. Maximiliano Gamarra Ferreyra had earned in accordance with Peruvian legislation up until 1992. The State did not comply with domestic judgments ordering the State to compensate the victims for lost pension sums. The Court found that Peru had violated the victims' rights to property and judicial protection under the American Convention on Human Rights.
Case Summary: Five Pensioners v. Peru, Case Summary
Compliance Update: Five Pensioners v. Peru
Year
2003
Country
Topics
Violations Against The Inter-American Convention On Human Rights
Did the State Accept International Responsibility?
Did the State Raise Preliminary Objections?
Judges
Separate Opinions
Reparations
Case Summary
Yes