|
SECTION
FOUR DEVELOPMENT
OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN
VARIOUS COUNTRIES DEVELOPMENT
OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN CHILE INTRODUCTION
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights prepared its First
Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile as a result of an in
loco observation conducted in Chile from July 22 through August 2,
1974. This report was presented to the General Assembly of the
Organization at its fifth regular session, in view of the time that had
elapsed since the Commission’s visit and the fact that the Government
of Chile had at that time agreed to the request of an ad hoc
working group of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to visit
Chile in the next few months, the General Assembly took note of the
report and requested the Commission to keep it informed of the situation
in Chile and to present another report to the Assembly at its next
session.
At its sixth regular session held in Santiago, Chile, in June
1976, the General Assembly of the OAS received a Second Report on the
Situation of Human Rights in Chile and requested the Government of that
country to “continue adopting and implementing the necessary
procedures and measures for effectively preserving and ensuring full
respect for human rights in Chile” and “to provide appropriate
guarantees to persons or institutions that may provide information,
testimony, or other types of evidence, to the Commission; the Assembly
also requested the Commission to report to it on the situation of human
rights at its seventh regular session.
In compliance with that mandate, the Commission presented its
Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile to the General
Assembly, at its seventh regular session. On that occasion the member
states requested the Government of Chile to “continue to adopt
measures to establish the complete enjoyment of human rights and that it
report to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights so that the
information it provides may be taken into consideration when preparing
the Annual Report” (Resolution 313).
At its Forty-Third Session, held in Caracas from January 26
through February 4, 1978, the Commission, on the basis of the data and
background information compiled by it, including that provided by the
Government of Chile, approved a Special Report on the Situation of Human
Rights in Chile, which covered the period since its Third Report; it
also decided to include it in its Annual Report for 1977, in accordance
with the mandate contained in Resolution AG/RES. 313.
At its eighth regular session, the General Assembly, when
approving the Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights (Resolution AG/RES. 368), which included a special chapter on the
Situation of Human Rights in Chile, resolved the following in operative
paragraph 5: “To call upon the Government of Chile to continue to
adopt and put into practice the measures necessary effectively to
preserve and ensure the complete enjoyment of human rights in Chile, and
to request it to continue to provide the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights with any cooperation it may need to carry out its work and
that it respect and grant the necessary guarantees to individuals and
institutions that may provide information, testimony, or evidence to the
Commission.”
For its part, the Commission, at its Forty-Sixth Regular Session,
when considering the resolution adopted by the General Assembly and in
view of the human rights situation existing in Chile at that time,
decided to include a report on the developments in Chile in the area of
human rights during 1978 as a special chapter in its Annual Report and
to submit it, through this Annual Report, to the General Assembly for
consideration.
This report, therefore, refers to those events that have
transpired in Chile during 1978 and that are related to the observance
of human rights. However, so that the report may be timely and present
an up-to-date picture of the situation in Chile, footnotes have been
added which refer to events that have occurred during 1979.
This report uses the same format that the Commission has used in
its previous reports on the situation of human rights in Chile. MODIFICATIONS
IN THE SYSTEM OF JURIDICAL STANDARDS RELATED TO
HUMAN RIGHTS
The major legislation enacted during 1978 related to human rights
is as follows:
a) Supreme Decree Nº
391, from the Ministry of National Defense,
March 10, 1978
Supreme Decree Nº 391, from the Ministry of National Defense,
declared a State of Emergency throughout Chile for a six-month period,
on the grounds of “public calamity.”
This declaration of a State of Emergency is characterized as
follows:
i.
In 1960, a “public calamity” was included as one of the
grounds for granting extraordinary powers to the military authorities in
cases of catastrophies caused by natural phenomena; its immediate roots
were the earthquakes that struck the southern part of the country on May
21, and 22, 1960.
In March of 1978, the “public calamity” which the Government
invoked as its grounds for decreeing the state of juridical exception
had not occurred in the country.
ii.
The law, in keeping with the purpose of the emergency regime,
empowers the President of the Republic to declare it only “in the
affected zone.” However, Supreme Decree Nº 391 declares a state of
emergency throughout the entire territory of the Republic.
iii.
The state of emergency decreed in March 1978 is distinct from
that provided for traditionally in Chile’s juridical system; this is
due to changes introduced into the system by the Military Junta. For
example, Decree Law Nº 1,281 of December 11, 1975, which empowered the
authorities to declare a state of emergency “for one time only” was
abolished. The Military Junta has consecutively extended the states of
emergency since September 1973. By virtue of Decree Law Nº 1,281, the
following powers were added to those of the Military Chief of the zone
during a State of Emergency: “to suspend the printing, distribution
and sale of up to six editions of newspapers, magazines, pamphlets and
printed literature in general, and up to six days of broadcasts by radio
and television stations or any other similar information media that
publishes opinions, news or communications that tend to create alarm or
dissatisfaction among the population, distort the true dimension of the
events, are clearly false or contradict instructions issued to them for
reasons of internal order, in accordance with the preceding provision.
In cases of repeated offenses, intervention to censure the respective
communications media and their workshops may be ordered.”
The changes referred to above are such that the state of
emergency now in effect is extraordinarily similar to the state of siege
previously in force, given the extent of the powers granted to the
authorities.
b)
Decree Law Nº 2,191, of April 19, 1978
Decree Law Nº 2,191 granted an extraordinarily far-reaching
amnesty for criminals, including those guilty of common crimes. The
measure benefited the following individuals:
i.
all those who, as principals, accomplices or accessories, had
committed criminal offenses during the state of siege, unless they were
presently being brought to trial or sentenced.
ii.
individuals who had been sentenced by military tribunals
subsequent to September 11, 1973. However, those who invoked D.S. 504,
and are now abroad, must request authorization to return from the
Minister of the Interior.
iii.
those who were criminally liable for any of a series of crimes
enumerated in Article 3 of the D.L. 2,191, which crimes are not
political in nature but rather common crimes (e.g.: forgery,
misrepresentation, perjury, crimes committed by civil servants in the
performance of their duties, crimes against the family order and against
public morality, except kidnapping, corruption of minors, rape, incest,
the crimes of homicide, bodily injury, dueling, calumny and slander,
larceny, usurpation, fraud, etc.).
Basically, this amnesty did not change the situation of
dissidents under the military regime and only meant the release of those
who were in jail, some of whom were forced to leave the country. The
situation of exiles did not change and numerous requests to return were
rejected.
c)
Supreme Decree Nº 1,364, of the Ministry of National
Defense, September 8, 1978
Supreme Decree Nº 1,364, from the Ministry of National Defense,
declared a State of Emergency throughout the country for a six-month
period, invoking the grounds of a “public calamity.”
The same observations made with regard to Supreme Decree Nº 391,
of March 10, 1978, apply to this decree as well. THE
RIGHT TO LIFE
a)
Homicides attributed to the authorities
During the period covered in this report, the Commission received
no denunciations alleging that any detained person had died in the hands
of the Government under irregular circumstances.
However, on the other hand, the Commission has been informed that
at least two individuals—the leader of the Revolutionary Leftist
Movement (Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria –MIR), Gabriel
Octavio Riveros Rovello, and a minor by the name of Lorena del Pilar
Labarca Lagos—died as a consequence of actions taken by security
agencies.
Lorena del Pilar, a three-year old minor, died as a consequence
of an act committed by Carabineros belonging to the 9th
Precinct of Santiago. On October 4, at 1:05 a.m., the Carabineros from
the 9th Precinct came to the home of Pedro Manchileo
Jorquera, an uncle of the minor; without prior warning, they opened fire
to force open the door. The gunshots wounded Pedro Manchileo and Lorena
del Pilar; the latter was hospitalized at the Children’s Hospital “Sótero
del Río” and subsequently died on October 8. The death certificate
lists “a bullet wound in the abdomen” as the cause of death.
b)
Individuals detained and later disappeared
No cases were recorded during 1978 of individuals having
disappeared following arrest; however, note should be made of a number
of important events that occurred during 1978 in connection with
individuals who had been missing since 1973 or thereafter.
i.
The April 1978 Amnesty: The amnesty decreed by the
Government during April of 1978 did not change the status of those who
had disappeared since the time of their arrest. On the contrary, it
meant that their situation became worse, as the tribunals that were
investigating the disappearances initially dismissed the proceedings
because of the amnesty. These decisions were appealed before higher
courts, which ruled that the proceedings must continue.
ii.
The Government’s promise to investigate: In June 1978
the Government, through the Minister of the Interior, expressed to the
Cardinal and to the President of the Catholic Episcopal Conference of
Chile a willingness “to clarify, within a brief period of time, the
fate of each one of the individuals whose disappearance has been
certified before competent organs” (Statement of the National
Episcopate, June 6, 1978).
Later, on June 15, in a statement broadcast via a national
network, the Minister of the Interior stated “whatever the truth may
be in each case, the Government will explore every serious channel it
can find in connection with any specific case.”
In response to this promise on the part of the Government to
investigate the cases of the disappeared, a number of bishops of the
Catholic Church sent individual letters to the Minister of the Interior
providing background information on hundreds of specific cases of
disappeared detainees.
As of the date of approval of this report, the Ministry of the
Interior has not responded to any of the cases presented by the Chilean
bishops.
iii.
Request for ad hoc ministers: With the failure of the
attempts made by relatives and the Church to have the Government clarify
the situation of the missing persons, on November 3, 1978, the vicars of
the Church in Santiago requested the Supreme Court to appoint special ad
hoc ministers to investigate the disappearance of 650 detainees.1
iv.
Discovery of bodies at Lonquén
On the basis of information given to a priest by a private party,
the discovery of human remains in an abandoned lime quarry in the town
of Lonquén was verified, which is located 14 kilometers from the city
of Talagante, Province of Santiago. Once a committee appointed by the
archbishop of Santiago had confirmed the information at the scene of the
events, the facts were brought to the attention of the President of the
Court of Justice.
On December 6, the Supreme Court appointed Mr. Adolfo Bañados,
minister of the Court of Appeals of Santiago, ad hoc minister to
take charge of the investigation.
At the Lonquén mine, two ovens were found that were
approximately 9 meters high; they had opening inside, measuring
approximately 2.5 meters in diameter. Also found were 15 corpses, as
indicated by the number of skulls removed from the mine. The bodies were
unidentifiable, since only bones remained. Numerous inquiries had to be
made and on the basis of the background information provided by
relatives of disappeared detainees, it was determined that the
individuals interred there were those who had been detained by the
Carabineros from the town of Isla de Maipó: Sergio Maureira Lillo, his
sons José Manuel, Segundo Armando, Sergio and Rodolfo Antonio Maureira
Muñoz, Manuel Jesús Navarro Martínez, Enrique Astudillo Alvarez and
his sons Omar and Ramón Astudillo Rojas, Miguel Brandt Bustamante, the
brothers Carlos Segundo, Nelson and Oscar Hernández Flores, Iván Ordóñez
Lama and José Herrera Villegas. The authors of the arrests and murders
of these individuals were the following Carabineros, all of whom belong
to the post of Isla de Maipó: Lautaro Eugenio Castro Mendoza, Juan José
Villegas Navarro, Félix Héctor Sagredo Aravena, Manuel Enrique Muñoz
Rencoret, Jacinto Torres González, David Coloqueo Fuentealba, José
Luis Mario Belmar Sepúlveda and Justo Ignacio Romo Peralta.
Once Minister Bañados found that the authors of the crimes were
police agents, he declared himself incompetent and the files were
forwarded to Military Tribunals.1
b)
Illegal executions
During 1978, the Commission did not receive any communication
denouncing illegal executions by Chilean authorities. THE
PHYSICAL LIBERTY OF PERSONS
a)
Individual detentions
During 1978, the Commission was informed of hundreds of arrests
made by security agencies (CNI) and police agencies (especially, the
Carabineros and the Investigations Unit). As a general rule, the legal
procedures governing arrest were not followed. Under the state of
emergency now in force, only the President of the Republic is empowered
to arrest, which should be carried out by the regular police. However,
most of the arrests during 1978 were made by the Central Nacional de
Informaciones (CNI), an agency that is empowered to make arrests only in
exceptional circumstances (when there is an order from a military
tribunal.) By making these arrests, the CNI exceeded its authority.
Moreover, it also failed to observe the provisions contained in Decree
Law Nº 146, which stipulate where the individuals arrested are to be
confined; in many cases the detainees were taken to secret places for
detention.
In accordance with the information in the hands of the
Commission, the arrests involved around 1,500 individuals, although most
of them were released after a few days in detention.
d)
Mass arrests
During 1978, there were numerous cases of mass arrests,
especially by the Carabineros. Generally the detainees were taken to
police headquarters where they were interrogated and, in some instances,
mistreated. This happened, for example, on May 1, International Labor
Day, when approximately 80 individuals were arrested; in June, when the
university students expressed solidarity with families of the
disappeared detainees and held a hunger strike, which led to the arrest
of approximately 400 individuals; in September (69 detainees), because
of the labor unrest in the Province of El Loa; on December 14,
approximately 70 individuals were arrested on the occasion of a public
event called by labor leaders.
c)
Refusal to allow Chileans to re-enter their country
Most of the denunciations received by the Commission during 1978
in connection with the physical liberty of persons referred to the many
Chileans who, by a decision of the Ministry of the Interior, were denied
the right to re-enter their own country; thus it failed to observe the
text of Article VIII of the American Declaration of the Rights and
Duties of Man. In most of the cases, the reason given by the Chilean
authorities was simple that re-entry into the country was not being
authorized for “reasons of national security,” an explanation that
the Commission considers inadequate.
In accordance with Chilean law in force, the right to re-enter
the country is subject to the arbitrary will of the authorities, as
provided in Decree Laws Nº 81 (which is in force under the state of
emergency) and Nº 604.
The Commission has been informed of numerous cases of individuals
whose right to return to the country was denied during 1978. Such was
the case with the following individuals: César Godoy Urrutia, Víctor
Arancibia Palma, Hernán Alegría Vera, Graciela Arancibia Gutiérrez,
Alejandra Benítez González, Sergio Bobillier Camus, David Bravo
Ibarra, Jaime Cárdenas Aguirre, Jorge Daved Sumar, Régulo Díaz Barría,
Elsa Escribar Lagos, Hernán Fuentes Bustamante, Carlos Gómez Gómez,
Jesús Guinat Morales, Nivio Gutiérrez G., Oscar Letelier Guzeta,
Enrique Leyton Sánchez, María López Miranda, Rafael Mellafe Campos,
Mario Moreno Aqueveque, Armando Muñoz de la Parra, Edgardo Parrau
Tejos, Guillermo Pavéz Phillips, Juan Peñaloza Rojas, Nicolás Pereira
Iturriaga, Rusela Phillips Araya, Miguel Rebolledo González, Luis Vásquez
Meza, Ramón Villalobos Ramírez, Moisés Soler Rioseco, William
Rebolledo Vera, Erike Bennings Cepeda, Emilio Quinteros González,
Claudio Huepe García, José Martínez Maldonado, Renán Castillo
Urtubia, Milton Castillo, Antonio Trujillo Cuitiño, Luis Esparza
Carvajal, Roberto Donoso Salinas, Raúl Manzano Isla, Sandra Hoces
Salas, Mario González Valdéz, Alexander Boyko Fauser, Mario Moreno
Opazo, Altamira Lorca Peña, Sergio Ravanal Depassier, Carlos Vasallo
Rojas, Gustavo Rojas Garay, Carlos Valdéz Bastias, Nicolás Andrés
Szinadel Bosze, Atila Szinadel Bosze, Mónica Fuentes Eldan, Ernesto Méndez
Fuentes, Ricardo Olivares Olivares, María Zúñiga Reyes, Matías,
Sebastián y Facundo Sepúlveda Pizarro, Lucepe Kessling Davidson,
Arcalus Coronel Araneda, Pedro Buqueño Cortéz, Mónica Alvarado
Inestroza, María Silva Fuentes, José San Martín Espinoza, María
Quiroga Aravena, Luis Sepúlveda Vega, Evelyn Ruth Koorteschiner,
Raimundo Chaigneau Valdéz, Juan Valenzuela Vuille, Luz Aguirre Baeza,
Manuel Jaña Marcoleta, Hernán Guerrero Sepúlveda, Violeta Cereceda
Parra, Olga Sthahandier Soto, Miguel Angel Solar Silva, Violeta Castex Díaz,
Víctor Berberis Castex, Franco Barberis Castex, Juan Vadell Amión,
Jaime Fernández Palou, Nelly Moya Naut, María Reyes Noriega, Gustavo
Medrano Zavala, Miriam Marticorena Jelvez, Gonzalo Ruíz Fernández,
Catalina Ruíz Barbaste, Raúl Espinoza León, Eugenia Velasco Martiner,
Graciela Alvarado Rojas, Héctor Mellado Diez, Arturo Montes Larraín,
José Diegues Rebolledo, Patricio Vogel López, Sergio de los Reyes
Herrera, Pedro de la Paz, Clodomiro Almeyda Medina, Jaime Suárez
Bastidas, María Elena Carrera Villavicencio, Hugo Facio Ricazzi, Luis
Valente Rossi, Erick Schnake Silva, Janaina Méndez Fuentes, Mario González
Valdés, Mireya Baltra Moreno, Hildegard Hudorling Marcovij, Jaime
Manuel Iturre Arredondo and Rafael Agustín Gumucio.
A number of these individuals submitted a formal denunciation to
the Commission, which, in view of the unsatisfactory replies it received
from the Government of Chile, adopted, in accordance with its
Regulations, the pertinent resolutions, which are published in another
part of this Annual Report. THE
RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT
Although the Commission is of the opinion that the practice of
torture has declined considerably as compared to previous years, at the
same time it notes that unfortunately this practice was not abolished in
Chile during 1978. In fact, a number of detainees have denounced that
they have been subjected to inhumane and degrading treatment during
their confinement, at the hands of agents of the CNI in most cases, and
by Carabineros and others.
Furthermore, the Commission has no knowledge that the Government
of Chile has adopted measures to sanction those responsible for the
torture practiced since 1973. THE
RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AND TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW
The Commission notes that during 1978 the right to a fair trial
and to due process of law was still subject to significant limitations,
principally because of the active role of the military courts in
handling the proceedings that affect certain basic rights and the
failure of the regular courts in general to actively investigate
violations of the most basic human rights.
Nevertheless, certain positive events have occurred in this
regard, such as the acceptance on the part of the Courts of Appeals of
their competence to hear recursos de amparo; the Supreme
Court’s appointment of an ad hoc minister to investigate the
discovery of the bodies at Lonquén, as explained in Part II of this
Report; and the request made by a number of bishops of the Catholic
Church in Chile in November of 1978, that the situation of disappeared
detainees be investigated, subsequently agreed to by the Supreme Court,
although only in part. FREEDOM
OF EXPRESSION OF THOUGHT AND OF INFORMATION
In this area, the severe restrictions imposed by the state of
emergency and Decree Law 1231 of December 11, 1975, continued in Chile.
Serious measures were adopted in 1978 to limit freedom of
expression among students; university authorities (in Chile, all rectors
of universities are officers or former officers of the Armed Forces,
appointed by the Government itself) went so far as to expel certain
dissident student leaders.
On the other hand, except for the suspension of two editions of
the evening paper “La Segunda”, the press did not encounter major
obstacles during 1978 and was even permitted to circulate a number of
publications that were either critical or independent of the Government.1 RIGHT
OF ASSEMBLY AND OF ASSOCIATION
During 1978, the rights of assembly and of association continued
to be seriously restricted, because of the state of emergency and other
laws of exception.
One area in which those limitations were patently obvious was
labor, as demonstrated by the following events that occurred during
1978:
a)
A number of labor organizations were denied the right of assembly
to celebrate International Labor Day on May 1. Even so, demonstrations
were held and the police authorities arrested approximately 780
demonstrators;
b)
On August 31, Decree Law Nº 2,326 was enacted, which declared a
State of Siege in the Province of El Loa, in the degree of simple
international disturbance. This measure came about because of the labor
unrest among the copper workers in that zone. As a result of that
measure, 69 labor leaders were deprived of their freedom;
c)
On October 20, seven labor federations and confederations, whose
total membership numbered in the hundreds of thousands, were ordered
dissolved;
d)
On October 30, national elections were held for union leaders,
which were called four days beforehand. During those elections the then
existing leadership of 2,500 industrial and trade unions was changed.
Workers who had been politically militant or who had participated in
political activities in the last ten years could not present themselves
as candidates in those elections; neither could those who had sought
office by popular election or who had held a labor post prior to
September 1973 or who had been government-appointed leaders. POLITICAL
RIGHTS
Political rights in Chile remained suspended during 1978 and the
Commission is unaware of any significant step taken during that period
to reestablish representative democracy. RIGHT
TO NATIONALITY
The Commission has no knowledge of any case of a Chilean being
deprived of his nationality during 1978; but at the same time, it has
also not been informed that Chilean authorities have taken any measures
to restore citizenship to those who were previously deprived of it in an
arbitrary manner contrary to international law. CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In light of the events and background information presented
above, the Commission feels that during 1978, significant changes
occurred in Chile with regard to the situation of the two most
fundamental rights—the right to life and the right to humane
treatment—as reports of cases of disappeared detainees have stopped
and the practice of torture has dropped considerably, although it has
not yet been completely eradicated in Chile.
However, the situation with regard to the other rights of the
American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man—principally the
rights to physical freedom, to a fair trial to due process of law,
freedom of expression of thought and of information, the right of
assembly and association and political rights—remain as they were in
those previous years which have been covered in reports prepared by the
Commission; severe limitations on the exercise of such rights persist.
On the basis of such considerations and in order to enable the
Government of Chile to adopt measures that will effectively improve the
situation of human rights, the Commission has drawn up the following
recommendations: a)
To adopt those measures necessary to clarify the situation
of the disappeared detainees swiftly and definitively;
b)
To make it possible for all Chilean exiles to return to their
country, in accordance with Article VIII of the American Declaration of
the Rights and Duties of Man;
c)
To abolish the state of emergency and amend the special
legislation in order to make possible effective enjoyment of the rights
to physical liberty, to a fair trial and due process, to freedom of
expression of thought and information, and to assembly and association;
d)
To take the steps necessary to reestablish representative
democracy which, as the Commission has repeatedly indicated,
significantly contributes to the observance of the human rights set
forth in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. [ Table of Contents | Previous | Next ]
1
This request was settled by the Supreme Court on March 21,
1979, which partially agreed to it (it did not agree to appoint ad
hoc ministers for the Courts of Iquique, Antofagasta, Copiaó,
Valparaíso, Talca and Valdivia; as for the Santiago cases, it
excluded those being processed in the jurisdiction of Pedro Aguirre
Certa, San Bernardo and Talagante.) 1
Later, the military courts took prisoner a number of police
officers named in the investigation conducted by Minister Bañados,
and charged them with a crime of unnecessary violence. 1
However, the most important and typical of such publications,
the magazine “Hoy”, was suspended for 60 days in the month of
June 1979.
|