The proven lethality of less-lethal weapons: The García Romero case at the IACHR

On the 28th of January 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights held a public hearing in the final miles of the case of Julio García Romero against the state of Ecuador. Nearly twenty years have gone by since photojournalist Julio García Romero died asphyxiated from tear gas inhalation while covering protests in Quito. Family members and Ecuadorian human rights organizations sought justice in national courts, and when that failed, they brought the case to the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights in 2009.

The upcoming decision by the Inter-American Court could set an important regional precedent as it will rule on the indiscriminate use of so-called less-lethal weapons, their impacts on the right to protest and accountability for human rights violations during social demonstrations. At the request of Ecuadorian human rights organization INREDH, INCLO submitted an amicus curiae to explain the inherent dangers of chemical irritants when used for crowd dispersal, the factors that make their use more dangerous and the multiple ways the Ecuadorean government and law enforcement failed to uphold Julio García Romero’s human rights.

Crowd-control weapons: dangers to health and human rights

The awareness of the dangers of chemical irritants as crowd-control weapons is rising, but there is still a long way to go to ensure that their use doesn’t lead to serious injuries, long-term disabilities and mental health impacts, or even death. Research conducted by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) and INCLO demonstrates that tear gas – the most commonly used crowd control weapon globally and perceived to be among the least harmful –  can cause severe pain, suffocation, and long-term impacts such as chemical burns and vision loss. When the canisters end up being used as projectiles they become extraordinarily hazardous. There are documented cases of canisters causing permanent disabilities and deaths in Iraq, Syria, Chile, Ecuador, among other countries and the misuse of tear gas has caused deadly stampedes in many parts of the world. These examples show that the assumption that crowd-control weapons are automatically a better option is false; no one reason makes weapons lethal or non-lethal. Their lethality depends as much on the type of weapon, as how, where and when they are used.

Given the indiscriminate and unpredictable nature of tear gas, it is very difficult for police to guarantee that their use doesn’t dangerously impact their target, as well as other peaceful protesters, passersby or groups of people that are especially vulnerable like children, the elderly or people with diminished respiratory capacity or who are pregnant. The use of crowd-control weapons should always be a last resort when dealing with genuine and imminent threats to safety and all other options have been exhausted. When police do decide to deploy them, they must first make sure to communicate with protestors and ensure there is a safe route to exit. In the case of the protests that photojournalist García Romero was covering, police threw enormous quantities of tear gas in streets that were very narrow and in spaces where people, including small children, could not safely exit. When García Romero criticized police for their disproportionate use of tear gas, they threw even more, in a move that was clearly punitive.

Ecuador: failed responsibility and accountability of the government and its law enforcement 

Government and law enforcement’s responsibilities around crowd-control weapons begin well before they make an appearance during a protest. When tools are intended to be used in protests, they must be designed and produced to ensure that they meet legitimate law enforcement objectives and comply with international law and standards. However, governments should not rely only on the tests and indications of manufacturers, but ensure their own independent testing before purchasing them, as well as ensure that only officials with specialized training use crowd-control weapons. Information about testing, purchase, training and the use of the tools needs to be made available by the government to the public to ensure transparency and facilitate any investigations that arise when violations are committed.

After the death of García Romero, his family and organizations like CDHN-PUCE and INREDH brought a case against the ex-president Lucio Gutierrez, the minister Oscar Ayerve and the general commander of police Jorge Paveda. The case was sent to the Attorney General to open an investigation, but was ultimately archived. In contrast, the Ombudsman Ruben Chavez stated “ violations of human rights were committed by members of the national police and I place responsibility in the state of Ecuador.” This case highlights the challenges and long fight that seeking justice entails for family members and society. Those deemed responsible by the family of García Romero continue to participate in politics without any consequences.

The global business of crowd-control weapons violates human rights

The challenges to ensure accountability for misuse of crowd-control weapons at the national level are compounded by how little we know of the multi-billion industry that produces and trades in these weapons. The fact that these weapons may be produced in one country, bought by another, and then used by a third state, complicates ensuring accountability for serious violations. 

Most recently, two UN Special Rapporteurs highlighted the immensity of this challenge. In late 2024, UNSR on Torture Alice Edwards published a report and three addendums centred around the manufacture, trade and use of policing tools that can lead to torture and inhumane treatment. In her report, she estimated that the market in the crowd-control weapons industry will be worth nearly $12.5 billion by 2028, rising from $7.4 billion in 2020. Edwards and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly and Association Gina Romero have expressed their support for a Torture-Free Trade treaty which would prohibit inherently cruel tools and provide a framework to regulate those that could lead to abuses. 

Despite advances in standards like the 2020 United Nations Guidance on the Use of Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement, it is critical that we better understand the dangerous nature of these weapons and how they can undermine human rights. With human rights organizations predicting that the number of multitudinous protests will continue to increase, we must ensure that the crowd-control industry doesn’t use this as an opportunity to financially benefit from the pain and lives of others. 

Bringing justice and accountability to these valuations is a crucial element towards stopping these abuses in the future and pushing governments to introduce regulations to stop the misuse and abuses of these weapons. Besides this important case in the Americas, a case on the use of rubber bullets in Georgia and more recently on stun grenades in Armenia have been brought to the European Court of Human Rights. 

By intervening in these types of cases in courts worldwide, INCLO hopes to build more jurisprudence and legal discussions to raise awareness about these violations and the many steps governments can take to prevent them.

The right to take part in protests and to document them

Julio Garcia Romero was a respected community member, partner, and father of seven who dedicated his personal and professional life as a photojournalist to support the causes of Indigenous communities, campesinos and the economically disadvantaged. Originally from Chile, he had to flee his country during the Pinochet dictatorship after being persecuted for his activism. His death should have never happened and his relatives hope that the Court’s decisions will bring some justice and prevent further deaths like his. Journalists, human rights defenders and those expressing their grievances should never fear for their lives for participating in a protest.

INCLO stands in solidarity with Julio García Romero’s family, the Ecuadorean organizations that have been animating this case for decades, and other victims of crowd-control weapons. A brief Spanish recounting of the recent Inter-American Court hearing by INREDH can be found here.