  |  | | Isabel Allende - Vanity Fair Online
02.12.2008
Isabel Allende wurde am 2. Aug. 1942 in Lima/Peru als Tochter eines Diplomaten geboren. Ihre Eltern ... Isabel Allende wurde am 2. Aug. 1942 in Lima/Peru als Tochter eines ... |
| |
 | You have information to share ?
Or mistakes to correct ?
click here...
|
|
| |  | | Augusto Pinochet Ugarte | | | context : | Chile  | | judgement place : | Chili | | status : | Died before end of trial | | particulars : | Proceedings closed concerning the "Caravan of Death", the assassination of General Prats and the "Plan Condor"; immunity denied in the Colombo case and the Villa Grimaldi case; Pinochet died on December 10, 2006 | | position : | General, President of Chili |
|
| | | | Following Pinochet's arrest in London in 1998, the government of Chile requested his release and affirmed its intent to have him tried in Chile. At first sight, several obstacles seemed likely to hinder the holding of such a trial, among them being:
- the law of 18 April 1978 which decrees an amnesty for all acts committed between 11 September 1973 and 10 March 1978;
- the immunity granted to Pinochet as a Member of Parliament and ex-President;
- the dominant position of the armed forces institutionalised by Pinochet himself in the 1981 Constitution which is still in force and pressure from high ranking military who highlight the potential danger of a trial for the security of the State
These obstacles have in part been overcome by legal decisions. Three requests out of four to have immunity lifted, have been successful Moreover, the theory of "ongoing offence" as applied to the crime of disappearance has enabled circumvention of the application of the Amnesty Law: Indeed, the Supreme Court in its decision of 20 July 1999 qualified the crime of disappearance as a permanent misdemeanour, and, as such, not subject to amnesty and imprescriptibility. Furthermore, the unconditional support of the military at the time of Pinochet's return has progressively weakened whilst at the same time a popular movement, increasingly favourable to a trial of the ex-dictator, has grown.
1. First case against Augusto Pinochet concerning the case known as the "Caravan of Death":
On 5 July 2000, the Appeal Court of Santiago decides to remove the parliamentary immunity of Pinochet. This decision is confirmed by the decision of 8 August 2000 of the Supreme Court. Judge Guzman can therefore initiate proceedings.
On 1 December 2000, the judge orders Pinochet to be held under house arrest after charging him as the mastermind and co-planner of the acts committed by the "Death Caravan". In the indictment the judge holds that Pinochet ordered the abduction of 75 persons followed by summary executions and disappearances. An appeal by the defendant attempts to have the decision quashed on the basis of a procedural flaw. In fact, the Code of Penal Procedure requires that the accused be interrogated before his indictment and that, if older than 70, he should be submitted to a medical examination. The indictment and house arrest order is annulled by the Appeal Court which did not take into account in its deliberations, as advocated by Judge Guzman, the interrogation already held in London. On 20 December 2000 the Chilean Supreme Court upholds the decision. This decision is based on a question of procedure and does not prevent the continuation of legal proceedings. The Court in fact grants a delay of 20 days to judge Guzman to proceed with Pinochet’s interrogation.
A first, brief interrogation takes place at Pinochet’s residence on 23 January 2001.
The medical results, to which 8 experts contributed, make mention of a «light to moderate senility ». On 29 January 2001, Judge Guzman issues another indictment and another house arrest order. An appeal by the defence against this decision is rejected on 8 March 2001 by the Appeal Court. However the Court re-categorises Pinochet's responsibility for the alleged acts as being one of accessory rather than as mastermind or co-planner as set out by the judge in the act of indictment. Based on this new categorisation, the Accused is released on bail on 12 March 2001.
Following a request by the defendant's lawyers, which refers to deterioration in Pinochet's health, the Santiago Appeal Court, on 9 July 2001, decides to temporarily suspend all legal proceedings. Based on the January 2001 medical tests, the Court rules that Pinochet is “is not in possession of the mental capacity to allow him to enjoy the rights he is entitled to at every stage of the proceedings under the principle of due process”. The Court further points out that it offers no opinion on the guilt or innocence of the accused but that it concedes the gravity of the charges. A year later, on 1st July 2002, the Supreme Court drops the charges against Pinochet because of his ill-health. This decision effectively bars any proceedings against him with regard to any responsibility he carries for acts committed by the "Death Caravan".
The mental state of Pinochet however is still subject to controversy.
2. Second case: «Operation Condor»
Following an appeal by lawyers of the families of the 19 leftist militants who disappeared between 1973 and 1990, Judge Guzman files a new petition before the Santiago Appeal Court. The petition is aimed at the removal of Pinochet's incapacity to testify so that he can give an account of his participation in "Operation Condor". To support the claim that Pinochet is mentally fit for trial, Judge Guzman bases his request on an interview given by the ex-dictator to a television station on 23 November 2003, in which he states himself to be in perfectly good health.
In 2002 Pinochet resigns as senator for life and thereby is no longer able to benefit from his parliamentary immunity. However Parliament confers on him immunity as an ex-President. For the 4th time a request to have Pinochet's immunity lifted, is introduced before the Appeals Court. Indeed, the law provides that the immunity of an ex-Head of State must be lifted during each case under consideration. A 1st request to lift immunity had been granted in the case of the "Death Caravan" (cf. above).
In its decision of 28 May 2004, the Santiago Court of Appeals lifts Pinochet's immunity with regard to acts committed under "Operation Condor". By a very small margin the decision is confirmed by the Supreme Court on 26 August 2004 thus opening the way for a potential trial. However, Pinochet's state of health could again be invoked to bring proceedings to a close.
Since the lifting of Pinochet's immunity was confirmed by the Supreme Court, two further steps in the proceedings relating to "Operation Condor" have gone against the defence. In the first, the Supreme Court turned down a request to challenge Judge Juan Guzman, on the grounds of his supposed antipathy towards Pinochet. In the second, in an attempt to prove the sound mental state of Pinochet, the plaintiff’s lawyers made a request to examine his will and to interrogate the notary with whom the will has been deposited.
Judge Guzman went ahead with a first interrogation of Pinochet on 25 September 2004 and ordered new medical tests. These concluded that Pinochet suffered a « mild form of sub-cortical vascular dementia ». The parties retain the possibility to lodge an appeal against the medical report.
Judge Guzman rated the mantal state of Pinochet as sufficient on 13 December 2004, placed him under house arrest indicted him. These decisions were confirmed subsequently by the Court of Appeal in Santiago on 20 December 2004 and by the Supreme Court on 3 January 2005. Thus there are no more juridical obstacles to close the investigations and initiate a procedure against Pinochet.
On 10 January 2005 Judge Guzman authorized the release of Pinochet on bail.
On 7 June 2005, a three-member chamber of the Santiago Court of Appeals unanimously decided to discontinue the procedure. The decision was based on the "moderate dementia" of the accused, a defence already sustained by the Supreme Court in 2002. The judges ruled that Pinochet "suffered neurological problems which render him incapable to defend himself in a legal procedure." The Supreme Court upheld this decision on 15 September 2005. Pinochet may therefore not be prosecuted anymore in the framework of "Plan Condor", which carried the gravest accusations against him.
3. Third case: the assassination of Carlos Prats:
Following a claim introduced by the daughters of the ex-commander-in-chief of the Army, Carlos Prats, the appeal Court of Santiago removed the immunity of ex-president Pinochet on December 2, 2004. However, the Supreme Court quashed this decision by judgement of March 25, 2005, thus making it impossible to continue criminal proceedings against Pinochet in the Prats case.
Carlos Prats was Augusto Pinochet’s predecessor in the role of Commander-in-Chief of the Army. He refused to join the military Coup d'Etat of 11 September 1973 and subsequently went into exile in Argentina. He was assassinated on 30 September 1974 in Buenos Aires. Seven former members of the army and of the DINA, including its chief Manuel Contreras, have already been charged in this same case.
4. Fourth case: the Colombo Case
In this last case, Pinochet is said to have covered the assassination of 119 members of the MIR, a Chilean leftist revolutionary movement. The victims' bodies were found in Argentina and Brazil in July 1975. in At the time, DINA had officially concluded that they had become the victims of a settlement of accounts between Guerilla movements.
Judge Guzman, who investigated against the militaries in this case, has already indicted Manuel Contreras, former head of the secret police under Pinochet, and 15 agents.
On 6 July 2005, following the judge's request, the Santiago Court of Appeals ordered, by 11 votes against 10, the lifting of the immunity attached to Pinochet's quality of ex-president. On 14 September 2005, the Supreme Court upheld this decision by 10 votes against 6. This decision paves the way for a possible trial and authorizes Judge Victor Montiglio, who took over the file when Judge Juan Guzman retired, to interrogate Pinochet. The Court, however, has ordered preliminary medical checks, which might again allow Pinochet to avoid a trial.
On 24 November 2005, Judge Victor Montiglio charged General Pinochet in connection with the disappearance of six dissidents arrested by Chile's security services in the course of Operation Colombo.
The same day, Pinochet was put under house arrest.
On 1st February 2006, Santiago's appeals Court ruled that Pinochet is healthy enough to stand trial for alleged human rights abuses stemming from the Colombo Operation.
5. Fifth procedure regarding acts of torture and illegal detention at the Villa Grimaldi.
This investigation evolves around Pinochet’s elleged responsibility for the deaths of 59 people illegally detained at the Villa Grimaldi. From 1973 to 1978, Chilean secret services, the DINA, used the Villa as a detention centre. Officially, 4500 people were confined and mistreated in the Villa and 226 of them died under torture.
On 20 January 2006, a decision by the Court of Appeal of Santiago revoked Pinochet's immunity by a large majority. This is the fifth time around Pinochet is declared not immune despite of his former presidential status. The decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Chile on 8 September 2006.
On 27 October 2006, a Chilean judge issued an arrest warrant in the "Villa Grimaldi" case.
Augusto Pinochet died on December 10, 2006, putting an end to all legal procedures in Chile and abroad. | |     click for more... | | Trial Watch would like to remind its users that any person charged by national or international authorities is presumed innocent until proven guilty. | |  |  | | nationality : | | | Chile | | | date of birth : | | | 25.11.1915 | | | last time seen : | | | Santiago (Chili) | | | period of charges : | | | 11.09.1973 | | | judgement period : | | | 05.06.2000 - 11.2004 | | | charges : | | | Torture | | | profile last modified : | | | 07.01.2008 |
| |
| | |
|
|
