Original article: Cambio de criterio en Justicia: El Estado dejará de oponerse a beneficios para condenados por violaciones a los DDHH By Magdalena Garcés, Tamara Lagos, and Paulina ZamoranoNetwork of Observers in Justice and Memory The Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Fernando Rabat, has instructed, through the head of the Human Rights Program, Constanza Garrido, that their lawyers will not participate in hearings discussing sentence reductions or alternative compliance for those convicted of crimes against humanity and human rights violations. This lack of representation for victims’ families diverges from the central purpose of the Program and from national and international legal frameworks. Thus, the current administration has defined a shift in the sentencing enforcement policy: the cessation of state opposition to judicial requests for release.
Unlike direct pardons, this passive “pardon” modality allows individuals convicted of crimes against humanity and who claim to be elderly or suffering from serious illnesses to gain alternative releases without opposition from state lawyers. This defense omission has effectively become the new route to dismiss the enforcement of actual imprisonment. In this regard, the Protocol of Action of the Human Rights Program, signed by the Undersecretariat of Human Rights on May 15, 2017, states that the legal area must intervene in actions brought by those convicted of serious human rights violations when: they have not cooperated with justice, are being processed or convicted in numerous legal cases, the impact of the early release of the convicted person has effects on their victims and families, or when it creates a sense of impunity regarding the execution of the sentence.
Additionally, it adds that if a resolution reducing the sentence, changing the compliance modality, or harming victims’ families is issued, the Program must appeal and contest such decisions, in accordance with international law and standards. Therefore, these new instructions contradict the official statements issued regarding the continuity of the Human Rights Program and, particularly, the National Truth and Justice Search Plan. Similarly, the substantial limitation on exercising the functions assigned to the Program indicates a dilution of the legally mandated public function.
The First Case: Operation Colombo – Aedo and Others, Main File César Manríquez, head of the Metropolitan Intelligence Brigade of the National Army Directorate (DINA), who oversaw all the clandestine detention and torture centers of the DINA during 1974, was sentenced on March 2, 2023, to 15 years in prison at the maximum level for his role as the author of the qualified kidnapping of 16 victims of enforced disappearance in the Operation Colombo case, Main File, who were held captive in the facilities of Londres 38, Villa Grimaldi, Cuatro Álamos, Venda Sexy, and José Domingo Cañas. It is important to recall that Operation Colombo was a disinformation maneuver by DINA agents aimed at concealing the enforced disappearance of 119 victims of the dictatorship detained during 1974 and 1975, in collaboration with the press from Argentina and Brazil. Recently, the 50th anniversary of the disappearance of these victims was commemorated, under the State’s promise to seek not only greater truth about what happened but also justice.
This agent of the dictatorship requested, through a protective action, to serve his prison sentence in freedom due to mental incapacity. The San Miguel Court of Appeals in case Rol 226-2026 accepted the appeal, ruling on the substance of the matter and determining the convicted person’s mental incapacity. In response, the complainants announced they would file an appeal since there was a psychiatric report indicating Manríquez might be simulating his condition.
The Human Rights Program did not appeal due to explicit instructions from its leadership, who indicated via email that the legal area would not intervene in court. In the internal evaluation process, the legal area lawyers expressed a different opinion, favoring the filing of an appellate brief, as there was a recent psychiatric report indicating possible simulation. César Manríquez is convicted in 57 final judgments issued by the Supreme Court as the author of crimes involving a total of 89 victims of the dictatorship (86 of enforced disappearance, 2 torture victims, and 1 executed).
The Second Case: Osses Yáñez – La Granja Sub-Station Héctor Osses Yáñez, an officer of the Carabineros who oversaw the La Granja sub-station during the dictatorship, and who has been convicted in 15 judicial sentences for 31 victims of enforced disappearance and qualified homicide, is requesting to serve his sentences in freedom due to mental incapacity. The Human Rights Program, in accordance with its mandate, opposed his request; however, on explicit instructions from the Minister of Justice and Human Rights, through his leadership, it has instructed not to continue intervening in these processes. It is worth noting that Osses was a fugitive from justice for about two years (from November 2021 until 2023), prompting the Human Rights Program to file a criminal complaint against him.
The Third Case: Operation Alfa Carbon Jorge Camilo Mandiola Arredondo, regional head of the CNI in Concepción, was sentenced to 15 years in prison for the Operation Alfa Carbon, staged by the National Intelligence Center, CNI, between August 23 and 24, 1984, resulting in the deaths of seven people in Concepción, Los Ángeles, and Valdivia from fabricated confrontations, and requested the court to suspend the execution of the custodial sentence in favor of house arrest, having served only two years in prison. In his document, he requests to fulfill the sentence under house arrest due to suffering from several diseases such as diabetes and sleep disorders caused by anxiety related to confinement. In the first-instance court, Judge Waldemar Koch, before ruling, referred the matter to the Human Rights Program and the complainants, who requested its rejection based on international law, among other arguments.
The judge, considering this background, rejected Mandiola’s request, leading his defense to appeal to the Concepción Court of Appeals. The case was scheduled to be heard by the Court of Appeals on April 21, with announcements made by the Human Rights Program lawyer and the complainant party. However, the head of the Program submitted a document withdrawing the lawyer from that department from arguing.
None of these decisions have been communicated to the families by the authorities, but rather through the lawyers, who without explanation have had to comply with the order not to intervene in these judicial processes.