By Juan Subercaseaux Amenabar
Secretary, American Association of Jurists, Chilean Branch

In the Monday, March 5, 2007 (page C12) edition of El Mercurio newspaper, Santiago Court of Appeals President Judge Cornelio Villarroel Ramirez offered his opinion on points of law related to human rights cases underway. The quotes in question are as follows:

PERMANENT ABDUCTION
"In my view, this does not exist. If we were to accept this crime as true, we would be building a crime on the basis of fiction. And penal law is not fiction. If Juan Loyola were sentenced, as perpetrator of permanent abduction, and the victim does not appear, that is a crime. But what would happen if Loyola were sentenced and then the individual appeared? A man cannot be punished on the basis of a hypothesis. Abduction is clearly defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure."

AMNESTY
"In my opinion, this is the best procedure for all countries that have experienced social conflicts, so as to forget the past, correct errors and then go on."

OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO HUMAN RIGHTS
1) Judge Cornelio Villarroel was one of the last judges to insist on maintaining prosecutorial immunity for Augusto Pinochet Ugarte on grounds of alleged subcortical dementia, to prevent his indictment for crimes of genocide. This was particularly evident in the Caravan of Death and Operation Condor cases. It caused society and direct victims serious prejudice by retaining impunity on the penal level as well as the economic. He decisively contributed by fostering distortion or by delaying cases until obtaining the definitive dismissal of Pinochet. This occurred in the Caravan of Death and Operation Condor cases, as well as in other cases involving crimes against humanity. (Carlos Prats, Calle Conferencia, Operation Colombo, Retiro de Televisores, etc.)

His opinions regarding permanent abduction and amnesty were extensively reported in the press. These opinions openly contradict jurisprudence dictated by the Supreme Court in relation to aggravated abduction and high court refusal to invoke the amnesty decree in cases involving disappeared persons and politically motivated executions. His opinions also flagrantly contradict jurisprudence established on both issues by the Inter American Human Rights Court that should be binding for the entire State of Chile, as the Court ruled amnesty inadmissible in crimes against humanity and its rulings are binding upon the three branches of government.

2) By expressing his opinion on crimes against humanity in the largest newspaper of Chile when numerous cases are in progress in the Courts, both in first instance and appellate courts, as well as motions to annul, Judge Cornelio Villarroel is exerting undue pressure on other judges, and his peers on the Santiago Court of Appeals, in particular, in light of his position as Appeals Court President. It should be noted that the Appeals Court President has the authority to participate in a chamber of the Court he presides. By making his opinion known prior to case rulings, he is in effect invalidating his capacity to do so in cases involving crimes against humanity, thus, infringing his public service obligation to participate in a chamber when called upon to do so.

3) Due to the considerations described above, we believe Judge Cornelio Villarroel Ramirez has incurred in dereliction of his duties as Judge and President of the Santiago Court of Appeals, in other words, as magistrate of a higher court of justice. His constitutional standing may be and must be challenged by the Chamber of Deputies, the Senate must find him guilty and then Congress must remove him from his position, as set forth in articles 48, N2, letter c) and 49 N1, of the Constitution of the Republic of Chile, for having gravely affected the honor of the State of Chile.

4) It is important to bear in mind that Judge Hernan Cereceda was removed at the beginning of the government of Patricio Aylwin on account of actions that were less clear and apparent. Cereceda had evident complicity with the military dictatorship but he did not publicly offer a judicial opinion. However, Judge Villarroel has offered an opinion that is totally contrary not only to the Supreme Court jurisprudence but also to rulings issued by the Inter American Human Rights Court, at 17 years after the inauguration of a democratic government. This action fosters impunity for perpetrators of crimes against humanity.

Back to top

Return to Human Rights Today