Case Tracker:  Litigation, Policymaking, and Standard-Setting

This area of work focuses on engagement in domestic and international litigation and standard-setting processes to advance health, justice, and equity in all of its dimensions through the strategic use of human rights legal frameworks. Strategic use of the law includes directly representing individual and collective victims of human rights violations, as well as providing technical assistance to relevant actors involved in legislative drafting, policymaking, and judicial practice.

This page is updated as of August 2024.

Case of Diana Aleman

Country: Peru
Court/Body: United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Status of Litigation: Pending

Diana Aleman, a Venezuelan migrant in Peru, lost her life due to healthcare failures and harsh abortion laws. Faced with barriers to care and threats of criminalization, her story highlights the urgent need for change. On June 24, Brenda Alvarez of the Proyecta Igualdad – Justicia Verde Association of Peru, the O’Neill Institute’s Health and Human Rights Initiative, and Ríos filed an individual petition before the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) seeking a declaration of the international responsibility of the Peruvian State. The petition calls for justice and reparations for Diana’s family and for the State to adopt measures of non-repetition, including changes to its regulatory framework regarding abortion and medical confidentiality.

In the News:

• El País, La muerte de Diana Aleman, la inmigrante venezolana criminalizada en Perú por abortar, se eleva a la ONU
• El Espectador, Murió criminalizada en Perú por aborto involuntario; ahora su caso llegará a la ONU

---

Federico Mora Hospital, Guatemala (IACHR)

Country: Guatemala
Court/Body: Inter-American Commission of Human Rights
Status of Litigation: Pending

In 2022, the HHRI joined Disability Rights International as a co-petitioner in the case and precautionary measures of “334 patients of the Federico Mora Hospital in Guatemala,” pending before the IACHR. The case concerns the institutionalization and horrific conditions of detention of 334 individuals at the Federico Mora Hospital in Guatemala, a publicly-funded psychiatric institution, and the human rights violations perpetrated therein. The facts of the case take place against the backdrop of a lack of community services for persons with mental disabilities in Guatemala, and a guardianship regime that precludes persons with mental disabilities admitted to a psychiatric institution from exercising their rights.

Case Proceedings:

• MC 370-12 – 334 Patients from Federico Mora Hospital, Guatemala

---

Oscar Walter

Country: Chile
Court/Body: Chilean Civil Court
Status of Litigation: Pending

Oscar Walter was a young man with Down syndrome who died at 38 years old of COVID-19 at the Félix Bulnes Hospital, in Santiago, Chile. Because he was a person with an intellectual disability, Oscar was deprioritized and mistreated by health personnel. He was not provided with the medical attention he needed, he was not assigned a clinical bed, nor did he have the chance to use a mechanical ventilator. The authorities did not even attempt to transfer him to another healthcare center where he could receive proper care.

His family, with the support of the Colombara Legal Strategy Firm and the Health and Human Rights Initiative of the O’Neill Institute, demands a finding of civil responsibility for the discrimination experienced and seeks both reparations and measures to prevent future discrimination of people with disabilities.

---

K.M. v. Guatemala

Country: Guatemala
Court/Body: United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Status of Litigation: Pending

In 2022, an individual petition was filed before the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on behalf of K.M., currently represented by the Asociación Generating Equity, Leadership and Opportunities (ASOGEN), the Health and Human Rights Initiative, and Ríos. The petition argues that the State of Guatemala is responsible for having failed to comply with its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The organizations are asking the committee for comprehensive reparation for K.M., and measures to prevent similar rights violations from being committed in the future.

K.M. is a woman with physical and intellectual disabilities who lives with her family in a situation of poverty in rural Guatemala. At the age of 17, K.M. suffered sexual violence, perpetrated on several occasions by her uncle, which resulted in a pregnancy. K.M. was never informed about the possibility of accessing an abortion, and after she carried the pregnancy to term and gave birth, she was sterilized without consent. The petition outlines how these failures to provide adequate care for K.M. as an adolescent with a disability and as a survivor of violence, led to violations of her sexual and reproductive rights.

The State of Guatemala also failed to provide K.M. with access to justice. During the process before the courts for “Threatened or Raped Children and Adolescents,” she was not provided with the support or adjustments required for her full participation in the process. Medical and judicial officials discussed K.M.’s well-being and whether or not a therapeutic abortion was appropriate, without ever asking her directly about her wishes or preferences — violating her right to justice and to exercise her legal capacity.

---

Martina Vera Rojas and Others v. Chile

Country: Chile
Court/Body: Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Status of Litigation: Decided

On November 18, 2021, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) issued a landmark judgment on the right to health in the Inter-American Human Rights System. The judgment clarifies that the right to health extends to palliative care and rehabilitation, particularly in cases of children with disabilities. The Court ruled that States have a duty to regulate, monitor, and oversee the activity of all public and private actors that finance the healthcare system. This is the first time that the IACtHR has declared a violation of the principle of non-retrogression in economic, social, and cultural rights. The HHRI represented the victims alongside local lawyers. As direct representatives of the victims, the team worked throughout 2022 in the wake of the judgment to assess compliance with the judgment and its recommendations and to maximize its impacts.

Case Proceedings:

• Escrito de Solicitudes, Argumentos y Pruebas (Brief Containing Pleadings, Motions, and Evidence) – Caso Vera Rojas vs. Chile (February 3, 2020)
• Audiencia Pública (Public Hearing) – Caso Vera Rojas vs. Chile (February 1, 2021)
• Alegatos finales de las representantes (Final Written Arguments) – Caso Vera Rojas vs. Chile (March 5, 2021)
• Caso Vera Rojas y Otros vs. Chile (October 1, 2021)

In the News:

• BioBioChile, Corte IDH determinó graves incumplimientos de Chile en caso de niña a la que isapre negó tratamiento

---

Casa Esperanza, Mexico (IACHR)

Country: Mexico
Court/Body: Inter-American Commission of Human Rights
Status of Litigation: Pending

In July 2023, the HHRI and Disability Rights International (DRI) presented arguments on behalf of the victims of the “Casa Esperanza” case in a public hearing on the merits before the IACHR. The case concerns institutionalization and abuses of persons with disabilities in Casa Esperanza, a private institution that received public funds to provide services to persons with psychosocial and intellectual disabilities. Some of the most egregious human rights violations included the forced sterilization, sexual abuse, use of physical and chemical restraints, and deaths of the patients. The HHRI and DRI argued that Mexico is internationally responsible for the torture, sexual slavery, human trafficking, servitude, forced labor, non-consensual sterilization, child exploitation, and right-to-health violations of the victims at Casa Esperanza, and emphasized that the State’s institutionalization of the victims constituted discriminatory treatment, denial of their rights to live independently and to receive health and care services in the community.

In the News:

• Yo También, Casa Esperanza, los horrores de una institución tolerada por el Estado

---

Colombia Case on Prioritization of Scarce Health Resources

Country: Colombia
Court/Body: Colombian Constitutional Court
Status of Litigation: Decided

In July 2023, the Constitutional Court of Colombia released its decision in the judgment T-237, ordering the Ministry of Health to regulate so-called “ethical triages” during health emergencies in the country. The Court recognized that the Ministry failed to regulate prioritization decisions for access to health services during the COVID-19 pandemic, jeopardizing the rights to health and to equality and nondiscrimination of the users of the Colombian health system. The decision came after 26 people with disabilities, individuals over 60 years of age, and individuals with chronic health conditions — with the support of the HHRI and the Action Program for Equality and Social Inclusion (PAIIS) at the Universidad de los Andes Law School — filed a “tutela,” a constitutional lawsuit in 2021 against the Ministry of Health. The lawsuit asked the Ministry to issue clear guidelines that prevent discrimination in the development and implementation of ethical triage recommendations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the judgment T-237 of July 2023, the First Chamber of Review of the Constitutional Court ruled in our favor and ordered the Ministry of Health to issue binding regulations on the matter. The Court noted that these regulations should be discussed in a participatory and transparent way, including inputs from relevant actors, such as organizations representing people with disabilities and older people. This important judgment recognized that the prioritization of scarce health resources in an emergency cannot escape the scrutiny of the Constitution.

Other Documents:

• Ámbito Jurídico, Criterios discriminatorios de priorización para acceder a una UCI en varias partes de Colombia

---

Liolita and others v. Brazil

Country: Brazil
Court/Body: Inter-American Commission of Human Rights
Status of Litigation: Pending

In July 2022, the HHRI joined the Defensoria Pública do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (DPERJ) on this case as co-petitioners. Filed before the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR), this case presents a number of individual complaints about inadequate resource allocation, specifically on intensive care units (ICUs) in Brazil, focusing principally on long wait times, and the violations of the right to health and the right to life that can result from delays in transfers into an ICU.