## Facts

- Baruch Ivcher Bronstein was born in Israel and later obtained Peruvian nationality through naturalization on November 27, 1984.
- By the mid-1980s, Ivcher became the majority shareholder and a senior executive of Compañía Latinoamericana de Radiodifusión S.A., the company operating television Channel 2 (“Frecuencia Latina”) in Peru.
- Peruvian broadcasting rules required media concession holders, and/or controlling shareholders of certain broadcast outlets, to be Peruvian nationals; as a result, Ivcher’s nationality status affected his ability to retain control of the channel.
- In 1997, Channel 2’s investigative program *Contrapunto* aired reports alleging abuses and corruption linked to Peru’s National Intelligence Service and officials associated with the Fujimori administration.
- After the broadcasts, State authorities initiated actions affecting Ivcher and Channel 2, including steps directed at Ivcher’s status as a naturalized citizen.
- The Peruvian government annulled Ivcher’s naturalization in 1997, asserting that he had not renounced his prior nationality before the competent Peruvian authorities as required by domestic law.
- Following the annulment of nationality, Ivcher was treated as ineligible to hold controlling participation in the broadcaster, and a series of measures and proceedings led to his removal from effective control and enjoyment of his shareholder and management rights.
- Ivcher sought relief in domestic proceedings, but the resulting decisions and remedies did not effectively restore his rights.
- The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights brought the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, alleging violations of the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR).
- While the matter was pending, Peru attempted to withdraw its acceptance of the Court’s contentious jurisdiction; the Court addressed whether that attempt affected its authority to decide the case.

## Issues

1. Did Peru arbitrarily deprive Ivcher of his Peruvian nationality, in violation of ACHR Article 20, in relation to Article 1(1)?
2. Did Peru violate ACHR Article 13 by using nationality and broadcasting eligibility rules, and related State actions, to indirectly restrict freedom of thought and expression by removing a media owner tied to critical reporting?
3. Did Peru violate ACHR Article 21 by interfering with Ivcher’s shares and the control and benefits associated with them after annulling his nationality?
4. Did Peru violate ACHR Articles 8 and 25 by failing to provide fair proceedings and effective judicial remedies concerning the annulment of nationality and the loss of control over the channel?
5. Did Peru’s attempted withdrawal of acceptance of the Court’s contentious jurisdiction limit the Court’s competence in this case?

## Decision

- The Court held that Peru’s attempted withdrawal did not deprive the Court of competence to hear and decide the case.
- The Court found Peru internationally responsible for violating, to Ivcher’s detriment, the following provisions of the ACHR, in relation to Article 1(1):
  - Article 20 (right to nationality), because the annulment of his naturalization amounted to an arbitrary deprivation of nationality under the Convention’s standards.
  - Article 13 (freedom of thought and expression), because the measures taken operated as an indirect restriction on expression by using State power and legal requirements to alter control of a television outlet linked to investigative reporting.
  - Article 21 (right to property), because the interference with Ivcher’s shares and the rights attached to them impaired his use and enjoyment of property.
  - Articles 8 and 25 (judicial guarantees and judicial protection), because the proceedings and remedies did not provide the required independence, fairness, and effectiveness.
- The Court ordered reparations, including measures directed at:
  - Restoring recognition of Ivcher’s Peruvian nationality and the rights attached to it.
  - Re-establishing conditions enabling Ivcher to take the steps necessary to recover his rights connected to his shareholding and participation in the channel.
  - Paying compensation for material and non-material harm, plus costs and expenses.
- The Court later issued an interpretation judgment clarifying aspects of compliance with the reparations ordered.

## Legal Principles

- Article 13 protects both the right to impart information and the public’s right to receive it; interference that affects media pluralism and access to information can violate the Convention even when carried out through formal legal mechanisms.
- Article 13(3) prohibits indirect restrictions on expression, including abuse of State control over regulatory regimes and requirements tied to media concessions when used to suppress or control editorial lines.
- Under Article 20, deprivation of nationality must not be arbitrary; decisions affecting nationality must comply with Convention requirements, including due process safeguards and non-pretextual application of the law.
- Shares and the rights they confer (including participation and control) are “property” for purposes of Article 21; State action that strips effective control or enjoyment without Convention-compatible justification and safeguards breaches the right to property.
- Articles 8 and 25 require more than formal access to procedures; tribunals must be competent, independent, and impartial, and remedies must be capable of providing real and timely relief.
- A State is responsible under Article 1(1) when acts across different branches and authorities, taken together, result in Convention violations against an individual.

## Conclusion

The Inter-American Court held that Peru annulled Baruch Ivcher Bronstein’s naturalization in an arbitrary manner and used the resulting nationality-based disqualification to facilitate his loss of control over a television channel associated with investigative reporting, thereby violating his rights to nationality, freedom of expression, property, and effective judicial guarantees and protection, and it ordered restoration-focused measures and compensation.


Ivcher Bronstein Case (Baruch Ivcher Bronstein v. Peru), Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Case No. 11.577 (2001)