CHAPTER II

BACKGROUND OF THE VISIT TO CHILE

1. The events occurring in Chile beginning September 11, 1973, which resulted in the fall of the government elected in 1970, the death of President Salvador Allende Gossens, and the installation of the government junta composed of the commanders in chief of the three armed forces and the Director General of the Police, under the presidency of the army Commander in Chief, General Augusto Pinochet, caused the presentation of numerous complaints and denunciations alleging violations of human rights to the Commission, and to the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States. The Secretariat transmitted them in the usual way to the Commission for it to take cognizance of them.

Acting in accordance with its Statute and Regulations, the Commission immediately sent appropriate communications to the Government of Chile, which in a number of cases furnished the information requested.

Meanwhile, denunciations of human rights violations in that republic continued to increase. These denunciations were of much gravity and urgency that they indicated the necessity to act with special seal.

With the consent of the Chilean government, the Commission decided to send to that country its Executive Secretary, Dr. Luis Reque, to collect information on a number of specific matters, and to add any comments that he felt in his experience might assist the Commission to reach a judgment on the general status of human rights in Chile and to study measures for better carrying out its assigned task.

The following communications give an account of these episodes, and the consent given by the Government of Chile for the visit of the Executive Secretary.

SEPTEMBER 17, 1973

HIS EXCELLENCY

REAR ADMIRAL ISMAEL HUERTA DÍAZ

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SANTIAGO (CHILE)

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION HUMAN RIGHTS HAS RECEIVED FOLLOWING DENUNCIATION “AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS OF MASS ARRESTS AND IN SOME CASES SUMMARY EXECUTION OF POLITICAL OPPONENTS AS WELL AS REFUGEES FROM OTHER SOUTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES, URGE OAS INTERVENTION TO SEEK AGREEMENT OF OTHER LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES TO GRANT ASYLUM TO SUCH PERSONS AND TO PERSUADE MILITARY AUTHORITIES IN CHILE TO PERMIT THEM TO LEAVE CHILE FOR THE COUNTRY OF THEIR CHOICE WILLING TO RECEIVE THEM.” “NEW MILITARY JUNTA MUST CONTINUE TRADITIONAL RIGHT OF POLITICAL ASYLUM GRANTED TO ALL POLITICAL REFUGEES IN LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES. ALSO URGE NEW GOVERNMENT IN CHILE TO OBSERVE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND TO ACT JUSTLY AND HUMANELY WHEN IT DEALS WITH OPPOSITION MEMBERS.” WE REQUEST YOUR EXCELLENCY TO FURNISH THIS COMMISSION WITH THE INFORMATION DEEMED PERTINENT. WE WISH TO INFORM YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN LIGHT OF ARTICLE 42 REGULATIONS OF COMMISSION THIS REQUEST DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A PREJUDGMENT OF ADMISSIBILITY OF THE DENUNCIATIONS. ACCEPT, EXCELLENCY, THE ASSURANCES OF OUR HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

JUSTINO JIMENEZ DE ARECHAGA

CHAIRMAN

LUIS REQUE

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

SEPTEMBER 20, 1973

HIS EXCELLENCY

REAR ADMIRAL ISMAEL HUERTA DÍAZ

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SANTIAGO (CHILE)

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DEEPLY CONCERNED BY COMMUNICATIONS IT HAS RECEIVED IN WHICH GREAT FEAR IS EXPRESSED THAT YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT MAY APPLY IMMINENT AND SEVERE REPRESSIVE MEASURES TO MEMBERS OF OPPOSITION AND POLITICAL REFUGEES THAT WOULD NOT BE IN HARMONY WITH THE FUNDAMENTAL RESPECT FOR RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL, SET FORTH IN THE OAS CHARTER AND IN THE AMERICAN DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF MAN, FULFILLS ITS DUTY BY STRONGLY RECOMMENDING TO YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT, IN EXERCISE OF THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY ITS STATUTE (ARTICLE 9.b), THAT ANY SUCH MEASURES BE TAKEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESPECT FOR THOSE RIGHTS. THIS COMMISSION, IN CONFORMITY WITH ARTICLE 9.d OF THE STATUTE, KINDLY REQUESTS YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT TO SUBMIT INFORMATION ON THE MEASURES THAT IT ADOPTS IN THE FIELD OF HUMAN RIGHTS DURING THE PRESENT SITUATION. ACCEPT, EXCELLENCY, THE ASSURANCES OF OUR HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

JUSTINO JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉCHAGA

CHAIRMAN

LUIS REQUE

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

SEPTEMBER 26, 1973

HIS EXCELLENCY

REAR ADMIRAL ISMAEL HUERTA DÍAZ

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SANTIAGO (CHILE)

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS REPEATS TO YOUR EXCELLENCY REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION OF CABLEGRAMS OF 17 AND 20 OF THIS MONTH. SINCE COMMISSION WILL SOON MEET IN COLOMBIA I REQUEST YOUR EXCELLENCY TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION TO VISIT CHILE TO GATHER FROM THAT GOVERNMENT INFORMATION ON SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.

SINCERELY,

JUSTINO JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉCHAGA

CHAIRMAN

SEPTEMBER 26, 1973

JUSTINO JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉCHAGA

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

IN RESPONSE TO YOUR CABLE OF SEPTEMBER 20, I ASSURE THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, THAT THE CHILEAN GOVERNMENT WILL CONTINUE FAITHFULLY TO FULFILL ITS OBLIGATIONS DERIVED FROM INTER-AMERICAN AGREEMENTS CONCERNING RESPECT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. THE INDIVIDUALS PRESENTLY DETAINED, WHO ARE RECEIVING HUMANE TREATMENT, WILL BE SENTENCED ONLY AFTER TRIAL, IF THEY ARE IMPLICATED IN CRIMINAL ACTS.

SINCERELY,

ISMAEL HUERTA DÍAZ

VICE ADMIRAL

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

DELEGATION OF CHILE TO THE

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

1255 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

Nº 709 October 5, 1973

Mr. Executive Secretary:

As you will recall, I had the pleasure of conversing with you on September 27, in the absence of the Chairman of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga. I thus carried out specific instructions from my government, with respect to the three cables that the Chairman of the Commission had sent to it requesting information with regard to denunciations received concerning my country's alleged violations of human rights. At that time, I reaffirmed the assurances given to the Commission by direct cable from my government, that Chile would continue to fulfill faithfully its obligations deriving from its inter-American commitments with respect to human rights. I also assured you that persons now detained in my country as of September 11 are receiving totally humane treatment and will only be sentenced if they are convicted of being involved in criminal acts. I also reaffirm to you that these assurances cover the absolute respect of my government for the rules on the right of asylum.

With regard to your request to the Government of Chile that you visit this country solely for information purposes, I stated to you that you would be informed in due course when you could do so. I am now in a position to inform you that my government has no objection to your coming to the country, if the Commission deems it appropriate.

Before closing, I wish to reiterate to you that the Government of Chile is ready and able to provide to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights any information that may be required with respect to the status of human rights in Chile, provided the concrete points that the Commission is interested in knowing are specifically detailed.

Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration.

Olegario Russi M.

Acting Representative of Chile

to the OAS

Mr. Luis A. Reque

Executive Secretary of the

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

Organization of American States

2. Having received the above authorization, Dr. Reque traveled to Santiago, Chile. He arrived there on October 12 and engaged in very intensive activity from that date to the time of his departure, on the 17th.

It is appropriate to transcribe here the pertinent parts of his report dated October 21, 1973, containing a detailed account of his activities.

1. Interviews with Authorities of the Chilean Government

a. With the Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs

On Saturday the 13th at 9:00 a.m., I was received by the Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, to whom I expressed the Commission's appreciation for authorizing my visit to Chile.

The Undersecretary stated that his government would be very pleased to facilitate the work of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with regard to the denunciations received respecting his country and told me that he would furnish me all necessary information so that I could transmit it to the Commission.

b. With the Minister of the Interior

On the same day, Saturday, October 13, at 10:00 a.m., I had an interview with the Minister of the Interior, General Oscar Bonilla, whom I informed of the purpose of my visit to Chile and particularly of the Commission's interest in receiving information regarding: 1) detained persons; 2) political refugees; 3) persons granted political asylum; and 4) those who had been summarily executed. I also indicated that the Commission would appreciate any information that the Government of Chile might supply on the status of human rights in that country.

The Minister of the Interior, General Bonilla, spoke first about the Chilean political situation in the last three years; the efforts the National Army had made to get the government of Dr. Allende to respect the constitution and the laws; the assistance the Army had given to that government in solving a number of crisis, particularly that of October, 1972. He stated that the situation in the country was so critical in September that the army, much to its regret, had to intervene to avoid civil war. He indicated that as a result of the events of September 11, about 6,000 persons had been arrested in Santiago and that they had been taken to the National Stadium because Santiago did not have enough jails for such a large number of persons; that the prisoners were treated humanely; that the torture referred to in the international press was not in accord with the facts; that there were some 35 interrogation teams and that as a result of the work of those teams, over 3,000 persons had been set free; that arrests were continuing because sniper activities were also continuing.

With respect to the status of political refugees, the Minister of the Interior stated that around 13,000 foreigners did not have their documents in order and were therefore residing illegally in the country; that many of them had been involved in the internal affairs of Chile; that the government was collaborating with the Regional Representative for Latin America of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; that the Chilean government would give those refugees who had not been involved in the internal policy of Chile the opportunity to get their documents in order; that those who wishes to leave Chilean territory would be able to do so without any difficulty; and that those who were involved in the internal affairs of Chile would be turned over to military justice.

With regard to those given political asylum, General Bonilla stated that Chile would respect its international commitments and that thus far around 1300 safe conducts had been granted.

The Minister of the Interior then spoke about the so-called summary executions and the propaganda that had been unleashed abroad against Chile in that regard. He indicated that in many cases it was not summary executions that had occurred but skirmishes between the army or the police and snipers. He said that, as a result of the activities of snipers, over 40 soldiers had been killed and more than 200 had been wounded. With regard to summary executions he indicated that the provisions on proper war-time penal procedures, set forth in the Code of Military Justice, had been complied with.

When I stated to him that I would be interested in speaking with the members of the Council of War and the lawyers of the executed persons, the Minister stated that no summary executions had occurred in Santiago but that they had occurred in Valdivia, Arica, and other places in the interior of Chile.

The Minister of the Interior concluded by stating that the Government of Chile would provide me every necessary facility for carrying out my mission. He added that Chile had permitted the visit of members of European Parliaments, the International Red Cross, the representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, foreign journalists, etc.

When I asked him if there would be any objection to a visit to his country by a subcommittee of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights or the full Commission, the Minister stated that there would be no objection whatever, since his government had nothing to hide.

c. With the Minister of Justice

On October 15, at 4:00 p.m., I had an interview with the Minister of Justice, Mr. Gonzalo Prieto Gandara.

The Minister of Justice spoke about the legal consequences of Decree Law Nº 3, published in the Official Gazette of September 18, which declared a state of siege throughout the territory of the republic, beginning September 11, as well as the legal consequences of Decree Law Nº 3, published in the Official Gazette of September 18, which declared a state of siege throughout the territory of the republic, beginning September 11, as well as the legal consequences of Decree Law Nº 4, which declared a state of emergency in all the provinces of the country. He described military justice and also referred to the request that the Minister of the Interior had received regarding voluntary collaboration of defense lawyers. He stated that, with the assistance of the Bar Association, a list of 50 such lawyers had been drawn up.

d. With the Chairman of the Supreme Court of Justice

On Tuesday the 16th, I had an interview with the President of the Supreme Court of Justice, Mr. Enrique Urrutia Manzano, who, after making a statement on the situation Chile had gone through in the past three years, spoke about the procedure that is followed when the country has been declared in a state of emergency and about the relevant provisions of the Military Code of Justice. He stated that persons accused of crimes would be judged under that code for crimes committed as of September 11, 1973, and that offenders allegedly having committed acts prior to that date would be subject to the procedures established by regular justice.

e. Documents Submitted

As a result of the above interviews with authorities of the Chilean government, I was furnished the following documents:

1) Texts of some of the edicts issued by the government junta September 11-21;

2) A list of provisions relating to state security;

3) Information on the status and handling of detainees;

4) The appendix to Official Army Bulletin Nº 43, which contains the text of Law Nº 17798 establishing control of weapons;

5) Decree Nº 1308 of October 3, 1973, authorizing the operation of the National Committee to Aid Refugees;

6) Copy of a secret memo of September 21, 1973, sent to the Minister of the Interior by the Minister of National Defense, transmitting an official list of deaths in Santiago September 11-20;

7) Various documents concerning the status of Chilean refugees, and confidential memos relating to the case of the Nicaraguan citizen María Esperanza Valle Buitrago;

8) The text of the speech given by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Admiral Ismael Huerta, at the United Nations General Assembly.

9) A magazine entitled “Three Years of Destruction.”

2. Other Interviews

b. With the Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and with the Representative of the International Red Cross

On Tuesday the 16th at 9:30 a.m., I had an interview with Mr. Oldrich Haselman, Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. I told him I had been much impressed by the way in which refugee Centers had been organized, having had the opportunity the day before to visit the “Padre Hurtado” Refugee Center, and that I was grateful to his collaborators for the facilities they had provided me. Mr. Hasselman informed me that there were seven refugee centers housing a total of 800 refugees and that the establishment of the refugee centers was made possible by the way the government junta had cooperated. He spoke of Decree 1308 of October 3, which authorized the establishment of the National Committee to Aid Refugees, and made same remarks on the possibility that the refugees might leave Chile. He indicated that, up to that time, only a few governments, among them Sweden and Switzerland, were willing to permit the entry of those persons, and that he had hopes Peru would open its doors. He also spoke about the denunciations relating to the treatment foreigners had received during their detention, but indicated that this was more a matter within the competence of the CIDH.

3. Visits

a. Arsenals

On Monday, October 13, at 9:30 a.m., I visited the war arsenals, in the company of Army Major Luis Mericq. I was told about the weapons seized by the armed forces and the police in the presidential residence of Tomás Moro, La Moneda and other locations. I observed the supply of caliber 7-62 automatic rifles, numerous Garat rifles of Italian M-1 manufacture, similar to those of the United States army: automatic rifles of Czech manufacture; automatic pistols of Soviet manufacture; Soviet manufactured and homemade rocket launchers; 60 mm homemade mortars; 57 mm. Recoilless cannons; bullet-proof vests, gas masks, and other materiel. I was given documents on the armaments seized in Santiago after September 11 of this year.

b. National Stadium

Later I went to the National Stadium, the main detainee center. During my visit to the sports arena, I was accompanied by Colonel Jorge Espinoza. I was informed that, from September 11 to that date, approximately 4,000 persons had been released. On that date, 2,603 persons were in detention, 173 of whom were women. I was also informed that, in the near future, 550 prisoners would be released and that the status of all detainees would be decided by November 5.

I was informed that 250 detainees were foreigners, that 120 would be released, and that most of them were Brazilians, Uruguayans, and Bolivians.

I spoke with some prisoners, among them, Dr. Samuel Pasik, an Argentine, who stated that he was arrested in Puerto Montt and that after six days he had been transferred to the National Stadium in Santiago. He said he did not know the changes against him. He indicated that he had been a resident in Chile for nine years and wishes to remain in the country.

The Bolivian writer, Luciano Borge, stated that he was arrested on September 24, at the entrance of the Mexican Embassy; that he had arrived in the country on December 23, 1971; that he had received good treatment and that he did not wish to return to Bolivia. He said he preferred to go to France or Mexico.

Julio Miguel Barraibá Figueredo, arrested on September 17, stated that he wished to go to Sweden instead of returning to his country Uruguay. He said his wife and children had already left Chile. He did not respond in precise terms when I questioned him regarding his activities in the country.

Ignacio Miashiro, a Bolivian, arrested on September 14, said he did not know the reason for his arrest or the charges against him, and that he did not with to return to Bolivia.

Raúl Irena Estrada, a Mexican, arrested on September 24, said he did not know the charges against him.

I also had interviews with the following:

Margarita Echeverría, a Chilean who had been arrested the preceding night. Her face showed visible effects of having received hard blows. She said her husband had also been beaten and that she did not know the reason for her arrest.

Laura Martìnez Silva, arrested on September 27 in the office where she worked. She stated she was accused of having held a political meeting on September 11.

Flora Espinoza Díaz, a Chilean dentist, was arrested on October 2. She stated that on October 8 she had been beaten during interrogation.

Soledad Urzia Pérez, a 16-year old student, who had been arrested on October 8. She said she did not know the charges against her.

María Emilia Tijoux, who was arrested on September 27. She indicated she had been unable to receive any news from her family and that she did not know the charges against her.

María Elena Gallardo, a Chilean, arrested on October 10; stated that she also did not know the reasons for her arrest.

Carmen Flores de Echeverría, a Uruguayan arrested on October 3 and pregnant, said she did not know the reasons for her arrest.

The women denounced having been disrobed and molested. They indicated that, when they were transferred to the interrogation rooms, they were blindfolded, but they were not supplied with blindfolds and were forced to use their underclothing for that purpose.

Among the Chilean prisoners with whom I spoke was Manuel Vásquez, who said he had been arrested on October 3, and did not know the charges against him.

The women prisoners asked that future interrogations be conducted by the armed forces and not by the air force, the uniformed or civil police. The Colonel agreed to that request.

I also visited the field hospital, which was set up in the National Stadium on September 19, Mayor Tapia is in charge of it.

I was informed that prisoners are visited and assisted by the Red Cross and social workers.

c. Cañaveral

From the National Stadium I was taken to Cañaveral, another presidential residence, in the foothills section of Arrayán. It has been occupied by the army, and weapons were seized there. It was the military training site for the GAP and foreign guerillas. I was given a copy of the certificate of search and seizure.

d. “Padre Hurtado” Refugee Center

On Monday afternoon, October 15, I went in the company of Mr. Samuel Nalegach Pons, a member of the National Committee to Aid Refugees and a CEPAL official, to the “Padre Hurtado” Refugee Center. This institution is a CEPAL technical school and was converted into a refugee center by installing 120 beds. On my visit to the establishment, I found that services were fairly good. There were about 120 refugees, most of them Brazilians, Bolivians, and Uruguayans.

At the meeting I had with all of the prisoners, the following acts were denounced:

Luis Carlos de Almeida, (Brazilian) a professor of the State Technical University, was arrested and has disappeared.

Tulio Quintiliano (Brazilian), an engineer, was arrested and taken to the National Stadium and later to the Tacna regiment; he has disappeared.

Roberto Metzer (Brazilian), a FLACSO official, was arrested on the 12th, tortured, and taken to the National Stadium.

Antonio José Barros (Brazilian), a resident in Chile for two years, was arrested and has disappeared.

With regard to the Brazilian refugees, I was informed that the Brazilian Bar Association had requested the Government Junta to respect the human rights of the prisoners.

With regard to the Bolivian refugees, they stated that 350 Bolivians had been repatriated from the north of Chile on the basis of the refugee list furnished by the Bolivian Consul to the Chilean authorities and that many of the repatriates were in the concentration camps of Uyuni.

That Dr. Jorge Ríos Dalens (Bolivian), who had his papers in order and a fixed residence, was arrested and was presumed dead.

That Felipe Inigas (Bolivian) was arrested and tortured.

That Antonio Moreno (Bolivian) was arrested, accused of sniping, and has disappeared.

That Gualberto Lizarraga (Bolivian) was tortured and has a fractured arm.

That Luis Velez (Bolivian) was arrested and has disappeared.

That Carlos Toranzos (Bolivian) was arrested and has disappeared.

That Julio Baraymer (Uruguayan) was arrested on September 17, and has disappeared.

That Gonzalo Vergal (Uruguayan) was arrested and has disappeared.

That Delbo Ignasio da Silva (Uruguayan), with a tourist visa, was arrested and mistreated.

That Miguel Angel Ortíz Suárez (Uruguayan), with a tourist visa, was arrested and has disappeared.

That Dr. Ricardo Helena (Uruguayan), a cardiologist and professor at the University of Concepción, was arrested and tortured.

That four Ecuadoran students who were living in the Hotel Panamericano were arrested and had disappeared.

That Sócrates Ponce Pacheco (Ecuadoran), who had resided in Chile for 10 years was shot on September 11; he was living in Torre San Borja, Apartment 141.

That Dr. Marquez Rogalina (Ecuadoran), a physician, was arrested and has disappeared.

That Dr. Rafael de León (Ecuadoran), with a residence in Obispo Donoso 46, was arrested and has disappeared.

That Federico Vaires (Salvadoran), a student at the University of Chile, was arrested and transferred to the Tacna barracks and has disappeared.

That Luis Alvarado (Chilean) and Jorge Sabogal (Colombian) were arrested and have disappeared.

That Delbo Ignacio da Silva, Alfonso J. Sánchez, Miguel Angel Ortiz Suárez, and Basilio Salvia Mendez, all Uruguayans, are in the National Stadium and the authorities wish to force them to return to their country of origin.

e. San Luis Camp

On Tuesday, October 16, I visited, in the company of Major Luis Henríquez, the San Luis Camp, located in Las Condes. Twelve hundred families are living there, totaling some 5,000 residents. The camp has been in operation for two years and most of its residents are construction workers. A school with 400 students is located at the site. The camp is under the authority of the army, which has established a system of community aid, since September 22 of this year.

4. Deposition and Statements

a. I received the following statements:

1. The declarant stated that he was arrested on September 27 and taken to the La Puntilla police station; that he was subjected to maltreatment; that he was kept in a cell with eight persons, where he met a man with his son who were tortured; that his skull was fractured and that a rib was broken; that there was no interrogation. He arrived at the National Stadium on October 4 and was released on the 6th. He stated that those who were taken directly to the stadium were not subject to maltreatment, since all of the torture took place in installations of the Chilean air force and the carabineros. He stated that Litre Quiroga, head of the Prison Services in the previous administration, voluntarily reported to the police on September 12; that he was tortured for three days and finally executed. That Victor Jara, a labor union leader and also a guitarist, voluntarily reported, and they broke his hands and executed him.

2. The declarant submitted his statement in writing, along with photographs of José Sergio Alegría Higuera and Luis Eleuterio Mardonado Gallardo, who were found dead on October 12 under the Bulnes bridge.

He stated that, “on the morning of September 23, 1973, a group of over 20 inhabitants were arrested; the exact number was not known. They were taken from their homes by military forces and carabineros.”

Among the bodies that were found in the Mapocho River near the Bulnes bridge on the morning of the next day (the 24th), seven were recognized as having been arrested the day before. Some of them showed signs of beating, for example:

- Miguel Hernán Moreno Caviedes (missing an arm).

- Sergio Emilio Aguilar Nuñez (his genital organs mangled).

The following is a list of victims from the town of Nueva Matucana, with personal data:

1. Alvaro Javier Acuña Torres, 25 years old. Painter. Had undergone a lung operation. Married to Margarita Córdoba Santos, 18 years old. Children: Francisco Alvaro, one year old. His wife is expecting another child. Address: 179 Rafael Pacheco.

2. Miguel Hernán Moreno Caviedes, 18 years old, unemployed. Single. Mother widowed. Address: 7 Lautaro.

3. Miguel Zaldivar Arriagada, 28 years old. Civil marriage on September 25, wife expecting a child. Was working in a lamp factory and before that in INDESA. Address: 178 Rafael Pacheco.

4. Carlos René León Morales, 28 years old. Shoemaker. Married to Patricia Cárcamo, who was expecting a child. Address; 84 Fidel Estay.

5. Sergio Emilio Aguilar Nuñez, born in 1945. Single. Address: 66 Rafael Pacheco.

6. José Oscar Machuca Espinoza, 27 years old. Was working in “ATLÁNTIDA” factory of Pasta Nugget for close to eight years. Living with Luisa Gaete. No Children. Address: 78 Ramiro Sepùlveda.

Two bodies were found on October 12 under the Bulnes bridge:

1. José Sergio Alegría Higuera, 24 years old. Military driver's license Nº 18754. Worked for many years in La Frutera. Was living with his parents: Manuel Alegría (80 years old) and Blanca Luz Higuera (62 years old), (was taken from the river about one block west of the Bulnes bridge on the north bank). Address: Costanera… Was not a criminal and had no political affiliation of any kind.

2. Luis Eleuterio Mardonado Gallardo, born 1952. Worked in La Frutera after his discharge from military service, which he performed in the Military Academy in 1972. He was living with his grandmother, Octaviana del Carmen Bozza Garrido. Was not a criminal and had no political affiliation. Address: 93 San Jorge.

The two young men lived close to each other, and went out together on the evening of October 11 to go to the theater. “It is assumed that they were taken at Matucana. They must have been shot on the night of October 11 and remained in the Mapocho River until October 12 at 12:30, when they were recognized by members of their family. At approximately 1:00 p.m., members of the military arrived and ordered the people away. However, they did not remove the bodies, which were still there at 3:00 p.m.”

3. The declarant stated that on September 13, 14, and 15, thirteen bodies were found and that on the following Sunday, the body of an 18-year old youth was found with his head smashed and an arm missing; that at the Iquique bridge he saw two bodies, one a youth 15 years old and the other 20; that on October 11, three other bodies appeared three blocks from the Archbishopric in the west zone.

In addition, statements were made by two workers who did not wish to give their names.

Since one of the declarants stated that, on that same morning, he had seen six bodies, including that of a woman, on the banks of the Mapocho River, near the Bulnes bridge, I visited the site, and could see that the places where the bodies had been were covered with blood, and in one place, I observed pieces of brain tissue.

b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

c. I was informed that it was known from authoritative sources that, after the events of September, police agents from Uruguay and Brazil arrived in Santiago to request the Government of Chile to turn over to them some of the detainees from their countries. In fact, he stated that 16 Brazilian agents, with blue passports, entered the National Stadium to examine the records of arrested Brazilians and to identify them. I was also informed that six Uruguayan agents took the same action. Fortunately, when this maneuver was reported to the Representative for Latin America of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, he made the necessary arrangements with the Chilean Government to obtain compliance with the 1951 Refugee Convention, the 1967 Protocol, and the Declaration on Terrritorial Asylum, unanimously adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in December, 1967, which stipulates, inter alia, “that no refugee shall be expelled from or forced to return to any state where he may be subject to persecution.” I was also informed of the fate of 350 Bolivian refugees in the north of Chile, a matter I referred to previously.

d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

f. I also had the opportunity of conversing with a university professor and with a distinguished member of the Christian Democratic Party. Both agreed that the present situation was hopeful; that excesses had occurred, but not of the magnitude published abroad and that the intervention of the government in the universities was a big mistake. Both spoke also of the statements made by the ex-President of the Republic, Mr. Eduardo Frei, to the Madrid Newspaper “ABC” on October 11, when he said that the decision of the Government Junta to take power had saved the country.

5. General Comments

The following comments are based on an examination of the background information, documentation, statements and declarations I have referred to:

a. It can be stated that a number of prisoners were subject to harassment, abuses, maltreatment, and, in some cases, torture. However, it should be noted that reports appearing in the international press on maltreatment and torture are exaggerated. According to the information we received, such maltreatment took place, but usually in the police stations immediately after arrest and during interrogation.

b. With regard to political refugees, it can be stated that a number of foreigners were subject to persecution. The fact that radio and television incited the denunciation of all foreign extremists apparently contributed to this. The result was that both foreign extremists and non-extremists were denounced. Undoubtedly, a number of political refugees meddled in Chile's internal politics, and some of them held important posts in the government administration and in the nationalized factories and businesses during the Allende regime. It is also seen from the information received that a number of political refugees were subject to maltreatment. Some have been found dead, but it cannot be determined, without thorough investigation, whether these deaths were the result of skirmishes with the army or the result of executions by shooting.

c. With reference to those taking asylum in embassies, it is general knowledge that Chile is complying with the conventions on asylum. Up to October 16, 1973, a total of 1,779 persons had been given asylum. Up to that date, the Government of Chile had granted 1,660 safe conducts.

d. With regard to summary executions, we can only refer to the news on this matter, published in the newspaper El Mercurio of Santiago, Chile. The newspaper stated in its September 22 edition that “In a carabineros post, executions took place yesterday at 6:00 a.m. of three persons prosecuted by military justice for having machine-gunned an ambulance on September 11;” The September 28 edition reported that the ex-Governor of the province of Talca was executed by shooting; the October 2 edition reported that nine persons were executed in Santiago “on the spot” for opening fire on uniformed personnel; the October 5 edition reported that, in Valdivia, “Comandante Pepe” was executed by shooting; the October 6 edition reported that 16 extremists in Valdivia, Temuco, and Arica were executed by shooting; the October 11 edition reported that an extremist was executed by shooting in Puerto Cisne.

Regarding this subject, reference must also be made to the so-called “Law of Flight” (shooting prisoners while trying to escape). According to the October 5 edition of the newspaper El Mercurio, this law was applied to three individuals in Temuco; the October 11 edition reported that the law was applied to three individuals in Concepción, and the October 12 edition reported that the law was applied to six individuals in San Felipe.

Since the Minister of the Interior informed me that no summary execution had taken place in Santiago, it was not possible for me to obtain information on this subject. For that reason and by way of example, I have referred to several of the news reports published by the newspaper El Mercurio on this subject.

6. General Conclusions

From the preceding general comments, it is concluded that the Commission should consider the possibility of establishing a sub-commission to visit the territory of Chile, in light of the statement of the Minister of the Interior, General Oscar Bonilla, in the interview of October 13, to the effect that there would be no objection whatever for a sub-committee to visit his country.

The visit of a sub-committee to Chilean territory would be of major importance, not only to examine on the spot the events mentioned in this report and others, but also to study fully the status of human rights. It would be of great importance, for example, for the Commission to observe the procedures that are going to be followed in military courts for persons accused of crimes.

In conclusion, I want to express my very sincere thanks to the Government of Chile for the assistance it has provided me in carrying out my mission. I want to stress particularly the efficient collaboration of Mr. Jaime Lagos, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Army Major Luis Merocq, of the Ministry of the Interior.

(s) Luis Reque

Executive Secretary

This gave rise to the following exchange of notes:

Cali, Colombia

October 24, 1973

Mr. Minister:

The Commission over which I have the honor of presiding received yesterday, during the meetings that are being held in Cali, Colombia, the report prepared by the Executive Secretary, Dr. Luis Reque, on the present status of human rights in the Republic of Chile.

After expressing to you, Mr. Minister, and through you, to the distinguished Government of Chile, this Commission's appreciation for the assistance provided Dr. Reque in carrying out his delicate tasks, and also for the documentation which you have kindly transmitted to us, we wish to remind you that, according to the October 5 note transmitted to us by the Acting Representative of Chile to the OAS, your government is prepared to provide, in addition to the reports directly collected by our Executive Secretary, such other reports regarding specific events, that we feel it necessary to request from you.

Examining Dr. Reque's report, as well as a number of denunciations or complaints that have been submitted concerning the situation prevailing in Chile, we feel that, in order to establish our conclusions, it would be most helpful if your distinguished government would provide us with reports concerning two kinds of subjects: those considered to be so urgent that we have debated whether we should use the mail or the telegraph service to gather information on them; and others that, although not less important, are not as urgent.

This note will deal exclusively with the cases that we feel are most urgent. And it is for this reason that we wish to request your distinguished government to demonstrate once again its intent to collaborate with the high purposes of our Commission and remit as soon as possible the information requested, taking into consideration the possibility that the Commission may have to meet at its headquarters in Washington in three weeks. We would appreciate it if you could at least forward to us the substantive contents of your reply, either by telex or by cable.

The matters on which we request information are as follows:

1. We have been informed that the following persons have disappeared.

Luis Carlos De Almeida, Brazilian, Professor at the State Technical University, was arrested and then reportedly disappeared.

Tulio Quintiliano, Brazilian, engineer, arrested and taken to the National Stadium and afterward to the Tacna Regiment, then disappeared.

Roberto Metzer, Brazilian, FLACSO official, arrested October 12 and taken to the National Stadium, then disappeared.

Antonio José Barros, Brazilian, arrested and then disappeared.

Antonio Moreno, Bolivian, arrested and then disappeared.

Luis Velez, Bolivian, arrested and then disappeared.

Julio Baraymer o Baraibar, Uruguayan, arrested September 17 and then disappeared.

Gonzalo Vergal, Uruguayan, arrested and then disappeared.

Miguel Angel Ortiz Suárez, Uruguayan, arrested and then reportedly disappeared.

Dr. Marquez Rogalino, Ecuadoran, physician, arrested and then disappeared.

Dr. Rafael De León, Ecuadoran, living at Obispo Donoso 46, arrested September 16 and then disappeared.

Federico Vaires, Salvadoran, student at the University of Santiago, arrested, transferred to the Tacna garrison, then disappeared.

Luis Alvarado, Chilean, arrested and then disappeared.

Jorge Sabogal, Colombian, arrested and then disappeared.

Charles Horman, United States citizen, disappeared.

With regard to all of these persons, we urgently request the Government of Chile to provide us with any information it has available on the following points:

a. The whereabouts of these persons.

b. Their state of health.

c. Whether they have been deprived of their liberty, and if so, where.

d. Whether they have been brought to trial, indicating the court or tribunal and the charges made against them.

e. Whether they have a defense counsel, indicating his name and postal address.

2. We have been informed that the following persons have died by execution or torture:

Dr. Jorge Rios Dalens, Bolivian, who was arrested and was found dead.

Sócrates Ponce Pacheco, Ecuadoran, who was living in Torre San Borja, apartment 141, reportedly was executed by shooting on September 11.

Litre Quiroga, Chief of the Service of Prisons in the overthrown administration, reportedly was tortured for three days and executed in mid-September.

Victor Jara, labor union leader, who reported voluntarily to the authorities, was first tortured and then executed.

Jorge Sergio Alegría Higuera, arrested September 23 in Nueva Matucana, was found dead under the Bulnes Bridge. Lived at 93 San Jorge.

Luis Eulisterio Mardonado or Maldonado Gallardo, arrested September 23 in Nueva Matucana, was found dead under the Bulnes Bridge. Military driver's license Nº 18.754.

Miguel Hernán Moreno Caviedes, was found dead September 24 in the Mapocho River, near the Bulnes Bridge. Lived in Nueva Matucana. Apparently was tortured, since an arm was missing from the body.

Sergio Emilio Aguilar Nuñez, same as the above. His genital organs reportedly were mangled. Lived at 68 Rafael Pacheco.

Alvaro Javier Acuña, same as the above.

Miguel Zaldívar Arriagada, same as the above. Lived at 178 Rafael Pacheco.

Carlos René León Morales, same as the above. Lived at 84 Fidel Estay.

José Oscar Machuca Espinoza, same as the above. Lived at 78 Ramiro Sepúlveda.

With regard to the above-named persons, the Commission wishes to know:

a. Whether they have actually died and, if so, where the remains have been buried.

b. Whether death occurred through action of the government authorities.

c. Whether deprivation of life was preceded by the formalities required by Chilean law-both regular law and that applicable in emergency cases—and by Article 3 of the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, which we understand has been ratified by Chile.

d. Whether it has been possible to verify acts of torture or abuse of such persons.

e. Whether, in the event that acts of torture or abuse have been verified, or deprivation of life in violation of the applicable law, steps have been taken to avoid the repetition of such occurrences.

3. We have been informed that, in addition to those listed above, the following persons have been subjected to torture or maltreatment.

Margarita Echeverría, Chilean, detained on the night of October 14 and transferred to the National Stadium.

Dr. Ricardo Elena, Uruguayan, cardiologist, professor of the University of Concepciòn.

Flora Espinoza Díez, Chilean, dentist, detained October 2, reportedly was beaten during interrogation on October 8.

Felipe Iñigas, Bolivian, detained and tortured.

Delbo Ignacio da Silva, Uruguayan, detained and maltreated.

Dr. Claudio Weber Ubilla, physician, living at 1061 Roman Diaz, Apartment 34, detained September 27 and taken to the La Puntilla Police Station, where he was subjected to maltreatment and torture, suffering a fractured rib and a skull injury. He was taken to the National Stadium on October 4 and was released on the 6th.

The Commission wishes to know with respect to these persons:

a. Whether the maltreatment or torture referred to in the denunciations has been verified.

b. If so, whether proceedings have been initiated to determine the persons responsible and impose the appropriate penalties on them, indicating before what authority such proceedings take place.

c. What state the persons referred to are now in.

4. We have been informed that the following persons are imprisoned, without being informed of the reason for their detention:

Dr. Samuel Pasik, Argentine, arrested in Puerto Montt and transferred ten days later to the National Stadium.

Manuel Vásquez, Chilean, arrested October 3. Is in the National Stadium.

Ignacio Miashira, Bolivian, imprisoned September 14. Is in the National Stadium.

Raúl Irena Estrada, Mexican, arrested September 24. Is in the National Stadium.

Laura Martínez Silva, arrested September 24. Is in the National Stadium.

Soledad Urzía Perez, 16 years old, student arrested October 8. Is in the National Stadium.

María Emilia Tijoux, arrested September 27. Is in the National Stadium.

María Elena Gallardo, arrested October 10. Is in the National Stadium.

Carmen Flores de Echeverría, arrested October 3. Is in the National Stadium.

It is pointed out that the denunciations received also state that the above women were subjected to offenses against their modesty, having been forced to disrobe in the presence of agents.

With reference to all of these persons, the Commission wishes to know:

a. Whether they continue to be detained and in what place.

b. What is the cause, in each case, for the detention.

c. What judicial authority is trying each case.

d. Whether the defendants have been provided defense counsel.

Finally, we wish to state to Your Excellency that the requests for information contained in this note do not constitute prejudgment of the merits of the information received.

In the confidence that, as a result of Your Excellency's humanitarian sentiments and the excellent readiness the distinguished Government of Chile has shown to collaborate in the work of this Inter-American Commission, a reply to our request for reports will be sent with the urgency required by the seriousness of the cases in question, we are pleased to express to Your Excellency the assurances of our highest consideration.

(s) Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman

His Excellency

Admiral Ismael Huerta Díaz

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Santiago, Chile

Republic of Chile

Minister of Foreign Affairs

GMH/mic

OIA Nº 4958

Santiago, March 27, 1974

I have the honor to refer to Your Excellency's note, dated in Cali, October 24, 1973, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights requests, on the basis of a number of denunciations received, information concerning the status of 43 persons who reportedly were arrested or died as a result of the events occurring in my country on September 11, last year.

Regarding this matter, I am pleased to indicate to Your Excellency that, as soon as the request was received, the necessary steps were taken to clarify the facts of the denunciations submitted, since my government, as was duly indicated, is ready to provide any information, based on specific facts, relating to respect for human rights. A long historical tradition, of which my country is justly proud, enables me to affirm that the Government of Chile will continue to be faithful to that unswerving standard of international behavior.

I am replying below, point by point, to Your Excellency's note.

1. First, your note mentions a list of 16 persons who are reported to have disappeared. In this regard, I can inform Your Excellency that 13 of them either left the territory of the Republic voluntarily or were expelled from the country, because their presence, under legislation in force, constituted a serious threat against national security, since a number of these individuals apparently committed acts designed to disturb the peace of the citizenry and threatened the security of the state. These individuals are as follows:

Luis Carlos de Almeida: Outside the country.

Tulio Quintiliano Cardoso: Disappeared, despite a complete investigation of the case, as reported by the Ministry of National Defense.

Roberto Metzger Thomas: Outside the country.

Antonio José de Barros: Outside the country.

Antonio Moreno: Outside the country.

Luis Velez: Outside the country.

Carlos Toranzos: Outside the country.

Julio Miguel Baraibar: Outside the country.

Gonzalo Vergel: Unknown at the Embassy of Uruguay and his whereabouts are also unknown.

Miguel Angel Ortiz Suárez: Outside the country.

Marco Antonio Marcos Rogalino: Outside the country.

Rafael de León Rodríguez: Outside the country.

Luis Alvarado Cárdenas: Outside the country.

Jorge Sabogal: Outside the country.

Charles Horman: Was found shot to death on a public thoroughfare on the morning of September 18, 1973. It has not been possible to determine whether his death was caused by a military curfew patrol, which was obliged to fire because he did not obey the order to halt, or whether his death occurred at the hands of extremists who, under cover of night, fired against the armed forces, the police, and the civil population in desperate and suicidal attacks.

2. I should point out to Your Excellency that it is very difficult for the authorities to determine in certain cases the cause of death of particular persons. This is due to the fact that, as has been stated, extremist groups in the days following September 11 attempted to create problems by what were in effect suicidal attacks against the armed forces, notwithstanding the fact that the Government Junta repeatedly invited them to lay down their arms, which was an action the Junta took in fulfilling its obligation to safeguard public security and keep innocent persons from becoming sniper victims.

The persons alluded to in the Commission's note are the following:

Jorge Ríos Dalens: Dead. There is no official information on this case, and the cause of his death is being investigated.

Sócrates Ponce Pacheco: Dead. This individual was an auditor in an industry and resisted the action of the military forces, firing against them and perishing in the confrontation.

Litré Quiroga: Dead. This official of the overthrown regime was killed by common criminals.

Víctor Jara: Dead. Was killed by the action of snipers, who, I repeat, fired indiscriminately, both against the armed forces and against the civilian population.

No information is available, either because of lack of data or because investigations by Chilean authorities have not yet been completed, with respect to the following persons: Jorge Sergio Alegría Higuera, Luis Eleuterio Maldonado Gallardo, Miguel Hernán Moreno Caviedes, Sergio Emilio Aguilar Núñez, Alvaro Javier Acuña, Miguel Zaldívar Arriagada, Carlos René León Morales, José Oscar Machuca Espinosa. This Ministry will submit to the Commission, as soon as it is able, information establishing the status of these persons.

3. With regard to this list on which Your Excellency requests information, I am pleased to inform him of the following:

Margarita Echeverría: Released.

Ricardo Elena: Outside the country.

Flora Espinoza Díaz: Released.

Felipe Iñigas: Outside the country.

Delbo Ignacio Da Silva: Outside the country.

Claudio Weber Ubilla: Released.

4. With regard to this point, the following information is provided:

Samuel Pasik: Outside the country.

Manuel Vásquez: No information.

Ignacio Miashira: Outside the country.

Raúl Irene Estrada: Outside the country.

Soledad Urzúa Pérez: No information.

María Emilia Tijoux: Detained in the Women's House of Correction, indicted before a regular court. The inquest is being conducted by Judge Izurieta, of the Santiago Court of Appeals.

Carmen Flores de Echeverría: In searching the records one Isabel del Carmen Flores Garrido and one Carmen Flores Morador were found. Both have been given asylum.

In conclusion, I wish to point out to Your Excellency that the Government of Chile has been motivated by the firmest intent to collaborate with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the solution of problems which, may possibly have affected them, but it cannot accept under any pretext whatever that efforts should be made to indicate that it has had recourse to offenses against modesty, maltreatment or torture. Our government rejects most energetically any denunciations of this kind, considers them lacking in foundation, and is in a position to assert categorically that since September 11, there has been no policy of violating human dignity. Any violation of essential rights of man is, in our opinion, incompatible with civilized life. Moreover, from the very first, the new government instructed military personnel to act at all times in consonance with Christian and humanist principles which have guided and continue to guide the actions of the new government of Chile and that they should do everything possible to safeguard human rights.

I take this opportunity to repeat to Your Excellency, and through you to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, assurances of my highest consideration.

(s) Ismael Huerta Díaz

Vice Admiral

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman of the Inter-American

Commission on Human Rights

4. In the period transpiring between the above note to the Government of Chile of October 24, 1973 and the reply (March 27, 1974), which involved the conduct of complex investigations, the denunciations and complaints submitted to the Commission increased in number. This gave rise to additional requests by the Commission for information.

The Government of Chile replied to those requests in a note of November 28, 1973, which we believe it is necessary to transcribe:

Republic of Chile

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

OIA Nº 17806

Santiago, November 28, 1973

I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of Your Excellency's note of October 24, informing this Ministry of the “relevant parts of the communications on human rights,” which unidentified persons have sent to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (CIDH), making reference to the status of human rights in my country.

In this regard, I wish to state to Your Excellency that my government feels that the language employed by the persons who have sent these denunciations to the Commission is entirely improper and inappropriate, and the contents of those denunciations borders on illegitimate intervention in the internal affairs of Chile. Nonetheless, my government has decided to reply to these anonymous denunciations to show their unfounded character and to remain consistent with the faithful observance that my country has demonstrated and will continue to demonstrate of inter-American commitments on human rights.

Hence, I inform Your Excellency that Messrs. Mariano Rodríguez, Manuel Messias Da Silva, Arthur Jader Cunha, Solange Bustos da Silva, are persons who, after a brief investigation of their illegal activities in our country, have recently left our territory. With respect to the Chilean citizen, Mr. Luis Corvalán, I must inform Your Excellency that he is detained in the Military Academy of Chile, where he is enjoying excellent treatment, as journalists and foreign personages have verified. Mr. Corvalán will be brought to trial, under the country's applicable laws, for the crimes he is accused of. The Government of Chile assures Your Excellency that, at his trial, the standards established by the Chilean legal code for all citizens of the country will be strictly observed.

Accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Ismael Huerta Díaz

Vice-Admiral

Minister of Foreign Affairs

To the Chairman of the

Inter-American Commission

on Human Rights

Washington, D.C.

5. In another note, of October 25, 1973, the Commission expanded on the request for information it had sent the Government of Chile on October 24.

Since this new communication resulted in a very extensive and documented reply from the Government of Chile, it is considered necessary to reproduce both documents:

Cali, Colombia

October 25, 1973

Mr. Minister:

In our note of October 24, 1973, we submitted to you a request for information on aspects that we considered most urgent to examine in connection with the present status of human rights in our sister Republic.

We have sent that note in accordance with the generous offer contained in a note sent to this Commission by the Acting Representative of Chile to the OAS, Mr. Olegario Russi M., dated October 5 (Nº 709), in which he informed us that “the Government of Chile is ready and able to provide to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights any information that may be required with respect to the status of human rights in Chile, provided the concrete points that the Commission is interested in knowing are specifically detailed.

Today, by means of this communication, we wish to expand our request for information to cover other matters of a general nature, to supplement the information in the documents supplied by the distinguished Government of Chile through the Executive Secretary of our Commission.

The matters on which we would be very grateful if your distinguished Government would provide us information are the following:

1. Complete text of the decree-laws and other acts promulgated by the Government Junta, which affect, or might affect, human rights.

2. General guarantees on human rights. Are all or any of the general guarantees on human rights referred to in the decree-laws mentioned in the preceding paragraph still suspended? Is the right to take an appeal of “habeas corpus” to independent regular courts suspended? Are civilians brought—or can they be brought—to trial before military courts in some cases or in general? For how long—as a maximum—can a person be deprived of his liberty without being brought before a regular court? Is it mandatory for every person brought to trial to have defense counsel and for the guarantees of “due process” to be applied in handling his case?

3. Mass communication media. Is there a system of censorship, suspension or closure affecting the press, radio and television, or any other media? Are radio stations subject to a policy ensuring free expression of thought? Is it possible to shut down any of these media or cancel their licenses, without recourse to independent courts of equity? Has any system of censorship or control on the sale or circulation of books or printed matter been established for ideological reasons?

4. Status of individuals deprived of their freedom. Are persons deprived of their freedom for political reasons or for reasons of public security, subject to the same living conditions and discipline as those detained, indicted, or sentenced for common crimes? Are the two kinds of detainees confined in the same establishments? Are those detained for political reasons or for reasons of public security permitted to receive visits from members of their family? How frequently? Are they permitted to receive reading material? Are they permitted to communicate with defense counsel? Without the presence of officials who can overhear their conversations? Have special provisions been adopted to guarantee correct treatment for women deprived of liberty for political reasons or reasons of public security? Have steps been taken to avoid abuse or maltreatment of prisoners? Do prisoners have medical service available to them? Have provisions been made, in the event of the death of persons detained for political reasons of for reasons of public security, to have an autopsy performed in the presence of one or more physicians designated by the family?

Reiterating to Your Excellency the appreciation of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for the broad and generous collaboration in the performance of our duties that the distinguished Government of Chile has provided us, we are very pleased to take this opportunity to present our most cordial and respectful greetings.

Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman

His Excellency Admiral Ismael Huerta Díaz

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Santiago, Chile

Republic of Chile

Minister of Foreign Affairs

JLE/mic

Bureau of International Agencies

Nº 1977

Santiago, January 10, 1974

I have the honor to reply to your October 25 note sent from Cali, Colombia, in which Your Excellency, in response to the collaboration offered by my Government to provide the Commission over which you preside any information required in connection with the status of human rights in Chile, requests background information on this matter, to supplement the information that was personally delivered to Dr. Luis Reque, the CIDH Executive Secretary during his stay in Santiago, last October.

In this regard, and in reply to the questionnaire contained in Your Excellency's note, I am pleased to send the following to provide that information:

1. Complete texts of the decree-laws and other acts promulgated by the Government Junta, which affect, or might affect, human rights.

In this connection, the texts of the main decree laws that may be related in any way to the point proposed are enclosed. These are decree laws Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 18, 23, 25, 27, 50, 76, 77, 78, 81, 98, 105, 111, 112, 128, 130, 133 and 139.

Also enclosed are the military “edicts” issued up to September 26, 1973, as they appear in the edition of “El Mercurio” of that day; many of them deal with matters relating to human rights.

2. General guarantees on human rights. Are all or any of the general guarantees on human rights referred to in the preceding paragraph still suspended? Is the right to take an appeal of “habeas corpus” to independent regular courts suspended? Are civilians brought—or can they be brought—to trial before military courts in some cases or in general? For how long—at a maximum—can a person be deprived of his liberty without being brought before a regular court? Is it mandatory for every person brought to trial to have defense counsel and for the guarantees of “due process” to be applied in handling his case?

To begin with, it must be said that the decree laws mentioned in the preceding paragraph are in full effect, except for Article 2 of Decree Law Nº 5 which was replaced by Decree Law Nº 105, of October 22, 1973, published on November 20 of that year.

As a preamble to the replies that follow, we must briefly explain what is meant under our laws by “state of siege” and “state of emergency.”

According to Article 72.17 of the Political Constitution, by declaration of a state of siege there is “conceded to the President of the Republic only the authority to transfer persons from one department to another and to confine them in their own houses, or in places other than jails, or intended for the confinement or imprisonment of ordinary criminals.”

Law Nº 12.927, of August 6, 1958, on state security, contains the following provisions on a state of emergency:

Art. 33. When a state of emergency is declared, the respective zone shall be under the responsibility of the National Defense Chief designated by the Government, who shall assume military command, with the authorities and duties set forth in this law. For the exercise of his functions, in the various zones in which the state of emergency prevails, he may delegate his authority to any officers of the three branches of National Defense, who may be under his jurisdiction.

Administrative authorities will continue to perform their duties and to carry out their regular work.

Art. 34. The military commander shall be especially responsible for:

a. Assuming command of army, naval, air and police forces and others that are present, or that may arrive in, the emergency zone.

b. Taking steps to keep the existence or construction of military facilities secret.

c. Prohibiting the publication of military news, by establishing whatever press, telegraph, and radiograph censorship he deems necessary.

d. Repressing anti-patriotic propaganda, published by the press, radio, motion pictures, theaters, or any other means.

e. Regulating the transport, use and possession of arms and explosives by the civilian population.

f. Controlling entry into, and exit from, the emergency zone and traffic in it and subjecting persons considered dangerous to surveillance by the authorities.

g. Making use of locations and means of mobilization belonging to government, semi-government, and autonomous institutions, and state, municipal, and private companies, as necessary, and for the time required.

The authorities must make a detailed inventory of items requisitioned. A copy of the inventory must be turned over immediately, or within 48 hours, to the owner or to whoever is in possession of the item at the time of requisition.

The “use” referred to in sub-paragraph 1 of this Article shall give the owner the right to request appropriate compensation when the item is returned to him. If the parties disagree on the amount of compensation, it will be speedily and summarily determined by the judge competent to render decisions on large claims in civil matters. This action must take place within one year from the date the competent authority orders restitution of the item.

h. Order total or partial evacuation of districts, towns or zones, as considered necessary for the defense of the civilian population and for the success of military operations within his jurisdiction.

i. Take steps for the protection of works of art and public utilities, such as potable water, light, gas, mining and industrial centers and others, in order to avoid or counter sabotage; establish special surveillance over armaments, forts, war materiel, installations and factories, and prevent the publication of true or false news that may produce panic in the civilian population or demoralization in the armed forces.

j. Issue orders required for requisition, storage and distribution of all articles needed for assistance to the civilian population or for military use.

k. Control entry to, and exit from, the emergency zone of food, fuel, and war materiel.

l. Provide for declaration of militarily useful supplies available in the zone.

m. Publish edicts regulating services under his responsibility and the rules that civilian population must adhere to, and

n. Give any orders or instructions necessary for maintaining internal order within the zone.

Art. 35. When a state of emergency has been declared, and the commanding officer has been appointed, if operations must be undertaken against a foreign enemy or against organized rebel forces acting in support of foreign aggression, wartime Military Courts must be constituted immediately, as established in Section III, Book 1 of the Code of Military Justice.

Art. 36. The authority referred to in this section is understood to be without prejudice to the authority that other laws, particularly military laws, grant the President of the Republic to provide for national defense in the event of war, attack, or foreign invasion.

To complete what has been said in this Preamble, we must note that Decree Law Nº 5, of September 12, 1973, published September 22 of that year, in interpretation of Art. 418 of the Code of Military Justice, declared that the state of siege decreed because of internal disturbance, in the circumstances prevailing in the country, must be understood as “a state or time of war” for the purposes of the application of wartime penalties established in the Code of Military Justice and other penal laws, and in general, for all other purposes of such legislation.

Our replies to the question in Section 2 of the questionnaire are as follows:

a. Regarding the right of “habeas corpus”, we must make the following distinction:

1. This right is fully enforced for crimes subject to ordinary jurisdiction. We note that in the act establishing the Government Junta, contained in Decree Law Nº 1 of September 11, 1973, published September 18 of that year, the Junta declared in Article 3 that, “in the exercise of its mission, it will guarantee the full effectiveness of the judiciary.”

2. With regard to crimes subject to military jurisdiction, the remedy of “habeas corpus” is not applicable, as a consequence of the country's being in a state of siege, which, under Decree Law Nº 5, is equivalent to a “state or time of war.”

In fact, according to the provisions of Article 74 of the Code of Military Justice, military courts in time of war are under the commanding general of the particular territory, and the Supreme Court and regular courts do not have jurisdiction over them.

3. The remedy of amparo from decisions of the President of the Republic, issued in the exercise of the special powers granted to him by the Political Constitution in Article 72, Nº 17, is not in order either when a state of siege has been declared.

Regular courts may not judge in this exceptional situation, the political or de facto bases the governing authority has used to order a restrictive measure that is authorized and duly issued.

This has been the invariable decision of the Supreme Court, reaffirmed by the decision of the First Court of Appeals of Santiago, dated September 14, 1973, which denied the writ of relief filed by ex-Deputy Bernardo Leighton Guzman, on behalf a number of attorneys who had been arrested, among them ex-Ministers Carlos Briones, Clodomiro Almeyda and Jorge Tapia.

The Court held:

That by Decree Law Nº 1, dated yesterday, the military Government Junta declared a siege of siege throughout the national territory, which permits the imprisonment of persons in places other than jails or intended for the detention or imprisonment of common criminals.

Consequently, the fact that persons on whose behalf a writ of amparo has been filed are detained in a regiment—as indicated in sub-paragraph 1, the military Government Junta has made use of power granted it under Article 72 of the Code of Military Justice, in relation to Nº 17 of Article 72 of the State Political Constitution.

And according to the provisions of Art. 206 of the Code of Penal Procedure, a remedy of amparo filed by telephone on behalf of the persons mentioned in sub-paragraph 1 is denied.

File if not appealed. Nº 516-73. (A photocopy of the decision cited is attached.)

Expanding on the subject, note may be taken of the decision of the Supreme Court, dated November 13, 1973, under which the high court denied a complaint appeal filed against the War Council of Valparaiso, declaring itself incompetent to hear appeals against decisions of military courts, since, inasmuch as the country was in a state of war, such remedies were the responsibility of the commanding general of the particular territory, who had all-embracing authority to implement, revoke or modify his sentences. (Art. 74 of the Code of Military Justice.) The ordinary Superior Court, which is the Supreme Court, cannot exercise jurisdiction over the military command function that is exclusively the authority of the commanding general in a territory declared in a state of war. (A copy of this decision is attached to this communication.)

His Excellency

Chairman of the Inter-American

Commission on Human Rights

Washington, D.C.

b. Civilians may be subject to military jurisdiction. Aside from the fact that this derives from the general rules on military jurisdiction in time of war, this has been expressly declared in Decree Law Nº 5 of September 12 of the same year, which, in Art. 4e, modifying Article 26 of Law Nº 12.927, on state security, establishes: “in time of war, in any event, crimes stipulated in Articles 4, 5 bis, 6, 11 and 12 of this law shall be of the competence of wartime military tribunals.” (The article cited referred to crimes against the internal security of the state, against public order, and against normalcy of national activities. Article 5 was appended to Law 12.927 by Article 4a of Decree Law Nº 5, and provides as follows:

“Those who commit attacks against the life and physical integrity of persons, for the purpose of disturbing internal security or intimidating the population, or who proceed to confine or detain such persons in a manner covered by the terms of Article 141 of the Penal Code, for these same purposes, shall be sentenced to a major imprisonment term of any of the degrees of severity provided by law.

In time of war, the penalty shall range from a major imprisonment term of medium duration to a death sentence.

If the victim of the crime is killed or suffers severe damage to his person, the maximum penalty shall be applied, and if the maximum is the death penalty, that is the penalty that shall be applied.”

We should add that Decree Law Nº 13, of September 17, 1973, published September 20 of that same year, declared that the meaning and scope of Article 73 of the Code of Military Justice “is to confer on wartime military courts jurisdiction over military legal proceedings initiated in a territory declared in a state of assembly or of siege subsequent to the appointment of the Commanding General. Cases that began in peacetime shall be subject to the cognizance and jurisdiction of peacetime military courts, pursuant to peacetime procedures, until their definitive termination.”

c. While a state of siege is in effect, there is no time limit for detention without being brought to trial before a court of ordinary justice.

d. Both those brought to trial before courts of ordinary justice and before military courts must have a defense attorney and their case must conform to “due process”.

Thus, Article 197 of the Code of Military Justice establishes:

“Art. 197. Where the defendant does not have defense counsel to contest the indictment, or where the defense counsel designated for him does not duly carry out his functions or is remiss in meeting legal requirements, the attorney on duty, or if none is available, an attorney designated by the Government, shall serve as defense counsel.”

3. Mass Communications Media. Is there a system of censorship, suspension or closure affecting the press, radio and television, or any other media? Are radio stations subject to a policy ensuring free expression of thought? Is it possible to shut down any of these media or cancel their licenses, without recourse to independent courts of equity? Has any system of censorship or control on the sale or circulation of books or printed matter been established for ideological reasons?

The goals sought by the Government Junta (see, among others, Decree Laws Nos. 1 and 77) require constant vigilance, which has resulted in a certain degree of control over all types of information media. Those that were recognized Marxist propagandists or that did not follow instructions given by the Supreme Government (see Edicts Nos. 12 and 15) were closed down.

The Junta is desirous of gradually diminishing these controls as the circumstances of national activities permit. At the present time, all press organs are distributed without prior censorship and a number of radio stations have been authorized to issue their own information bulletins independently, subject to the general standards of responsibility for abuses of publicity.

4. Status of individual deprived of their freedoms. Are persons deprived of their freedom for political reasons or for reasons of public security, subject to the same living conditions and discipline as those detained, indicted, or sentenced for common crimes? Are the two kinds of detainees confined in the same establishments? Are those detained for political reasons or for reasons of public security permitted to receive visits from members of their family? How frequently? Are they permitted to receive reading material? Are they permitted to communicate with defense counsel? Without the presence of officials who can overhear their conversations? Have special provisions been adopted to guarantee correct treatment for women deprived of liberty for political reasons or reasons of public security? Have steps been taken to avoid abuse or maltreatment of prisoners? Do prisoners have medical service available to them? Have provisions been made, in the event of the death of persons detained for political reasons or for reasons of public security, to have an autopsy performed in the presence of one or more physicians designated by the family?

In this regard, it must be noted that no one is detained in Chile for political ideas, but only for the commission or the alleged commission of common crimes. In any event, those persons who have been detained for common crimes in connection with their political activity up to September 11 (illegal possession of arms, economic crimes, etc.), and those who have been detained for reasons of public security, are provided living conditions and subject to a discipline different from that applied to common criminals.

In general, they are confined in various establishments and locations, such as stadiums, public buildings, the detainees' own homes, or geographically isolated places.

For reasons of space, however, some of these prisoners are confined in places of common detention, but they are housed in different sections and are entirely separated from common criminals.

These prisoners are permitted to receive family visits and in particular cases, visits from notary publics, when some action of their competence must be taken. Only prisoners who are incommunicado do not have the right to have visits.

Prisoners receive visits from their families approximately every 15 days. They may also receive reading material. They are permitted to communicate with their defense counsel, without the presence of officials listening to their conversations.

Moreover, it should be reported that special provisions have been adopted to guarantee correct treatment of women deprived of liberty and that compliance with these directives is periodically checked by visits made to places of detention by various authorities. Strict rules have also been imposed to prevent prisoners from being mistreated, and compliance with these orders is checked periodically.

Prisoners receive complete medical attention, and also assistance from the Red Cross and social workers. The Minister of the Interior has authorized the Chilean Red Cross to act as intermediary between prisoners banished to some point in the country and their families, when the latter wishes to send them letters or clothing or bedding.

In the conviction that this note fully replies to the requests for information from the Commission over which Your Excellency presides, I take this opportunity to renew assurances of my highest consideration.

Ismael Huerta Diaz

Vice-Admiral

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile

6. It should be noted that at the 31st session held in Cali, Colombia, in October, 1973, the Commission unanimously agreed, immediately after deciding to send notes to the Government of Chile on the 24th and 25th of that month, “to authorize the Chairman… to request the Government of Chile's consent for the Commission to visit that country, in order to make an on-the-spot investigation of the facts, if it were considered desirable in accordance with the developments regarding the status of human rights and the replies that the Chilean Government might give to the above-mentioned requests for information.” (OEA/Ser.L/V/II.31, doc.54, rev. 1, p.15).

7. At its 32nd session, held in Washington, D.C., in Apri, 1974, the Commission requested, based on the report prepared by a special sub-committee composed of Dr. Dunshee de Abranches and Dr. Don Gabino Fraga, additional information from the Government of Chile on a certain number of individual cases.

The Subcommittee's report states the following:

CLASSIFICATION OF COMMUNICATIONS ON CHILE

Denunciations on specific cases and the general situation. The report of the subcommittee composed of Drs. Fraga and Abranches.

1. Case 1774: The documents received by the CIDH and submitted by the Secretariat to the subcommission are compiled in five volumes, designated as files A, B, C, D, and E, each of them containing a card indicating their contents.

2. In file D, the sub-commission examined 22 numbered folders, ascertaining that numbers 13, 14, 16, 17, and 18 were missing, and that there were two numbers 3 and 22. The communications relating to the Government Junta of Chile in these folders may be summarized as follows:

Nº 1. Denounces violation of right of asylum, “mass arrests, summary execution.”

Nº 2. Same denunciation as Nº 1.

Nº 3. Denounces Junta's goal to “exterminate Marxism.”

Nº 3. Denounces violation of right of asylum.

Nº 4. Denounces “brutal repression.”

Nº 5. Denounces “assassination of President Allende” and “attack on the self-determination of the Chilean people.”

Nº 6. Denounces genocide and political persecution.

Nº 7. Denounces violation of right of asylum.

Nº 8. Denounces “violation of principle of self-determination.”

Nº 9. Denounces “killing, torture and repression of political prisoners.”

Nº 10. Denounces “atrocities, bombing of civilian population, mass execution, 20,000 deaths.”

Nº 11. Denounces repression of the people and indiscriminate killings.

Nº 12. Declarations

Nº 15. Denounces “torture, killings.”

Nº 19. Denounces “repression, tortures, killings.”

Nº 20. Denounces tortures and executions.

Nº 21. Denounces persecution against political refugees and requests intervention to obtain asylum for their families, Brazilian refugees.

Nº 22. Denounces arbitrary arrest of Luis Corvalán, Pedro Enríquez and Jaime Barrios and “brutality” against Theotonio dos Santos, Vamia Baubirra, Juan Lechin, Emma de Jones, Hugo González Moscosa, Gustavo Beghaut and María Esther Gilio.

Nº 23. Denounces “torture, mistreatment of prisoners, detention without charge or trial.”

Nº 24. Requests that the CIDH send an observer “to current and pending trials.”

3. In file C there is a second folder number 22, containing a statement on the legal situation in Chile and a circular letter on the situation in that country, both favorable to the Government Junta.

4. File B contains a request for information on the status of the following persons: Luis Corvalán, already mentioned in folder Nº 22, Solange Bastos da Silva, Mariano Rodríguez, Manuel Messias da Silva and Arthur Yader Acuna. In notes of December 14, 1973, the Government of Chile reported that these persons had left the country, except for Luis Corvalán, who was in detention and would be brought to trial.

5. File A contains the first requests for information and notes to the Government of Chile, the report of the Commission's Executive Secretary on his mission to that country (Doc. 31-31 res.) and the documents that he received from the Government.

6. The report of the Executive Secretary contains denunciations received on October 12-17, 1973, concerning specific notable cases that have been classified in the groups indicated below:

a. Denunciations of the disappearance of 16 persons during the events occurring September 11, 1973, and thereafter, whose names and other data are contained in the report.

b. Denunciations of the alleged death by execution and/or torture, on the occasion of the same events, of 12 persons, whose names and other data are also contained in the report.

c. Denunciations of torture of six detained persons, whose names and other data are contained in the report.

d. Denunciations of arbitrary arrest of nine persons, whose names, place and date of arrest and other data are contained in the report.

7. In a note of March 27, 1974, the Government of Chile supplied information on the denunciations listed in the Executive Secretary's report, in accordance with our request of October 24, 1973. The Government note contains, among others, the following information:

a. Persons who have disappeared or whose whereabouts are unknown:

- Tulio Quintiliano Cardozo

- Gonzalo Vergel

b. Persons on whom no information is available:

- Jorge Sergio Alegría Higuera

- Luis Eleuterio Maldonado Gallardo

- Miguel Hernán Moreno Caviedes

- Sergio Emilio Aguilar Núñez

- Alvaro Javier Acuna

- Miguel Zaldívar Arriagado

- Carlos René León Morales

- José Oscar Machuca Espinosa

- Manuel Vásquez

- Soledad Urzúa Pérez

c. Deceased persons:

- Charles Horman

- Jorge Ríos Dalens

- Sócrates Ponce Pacheco

- Litré Quiroga

- Víctor Jara

d. Persons detained or in asylum:

- María Emilia Tijoux, arrested and arraigned by the Court of Appeals of Santiago.

- Isabel del Carmen Flores Garrido and Carmen Flores Morador, in asylum.

e. The other persons mentioned in the Commission's request for information are apparently free or outside the country

8. File E contains a number of publications and copies of documents that may be of interest in the study of the general status of human rights in Chile.

9. In addition to case 1774, the Commission listed, for information purposes and to give an overall view of the communications received with respect to the present Government of Chile, the following denunciations, whose handling the Commission is examining:

- Case 1786 – Arbitrary arrest of Lucy Lortsch, incommunicado.

- Case 1790 – Disappearance of Enrique Paris Roa.

Case 1799 – Detention and persecution of “siloistas” (“an apolitical group advocating peace.”)

- Case 1803 – Arbitrary arrest of Nelsa Gadea.

- Case 1807 – Communication on the general status of human rights in Chile, supplemented by documents and an oral statement to the Commission, on specific cases of individual violation, some of them contemplated in Case 1774.

10. In conclusion, the subcommission recommends that the following denunciations now making up Case 1774 be handled as specific cases of alleged individual violations:

I. File Nº 5 – Denounces “assassination of President Allende.” (Article I of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man).

II. File Nº 22 (Annexes) – Denounces persecution and arbitrary arrest of Luis Corvalán and others (detention and arraignment have been confirmed by information from the Government.) (Articles I and XXV of the Declaration).

III. Report of the Executive Secretary – Report on the homicide of Charles Horman, Jorge Ríos Dalens, Sócrates Ponce Pacheco, Litre Quiroga and Víctor Jara (death has been confirmed by the Government of Chile). (Article I of the Declaration).

IV. Report of the Executive Secretary – Statement on the arbitrary arrest of María Emilia Tijoux and other persons. (The Government confirmed only the arrest of the person named) but this should not exclude the possibility of investigating other arrests denounced (Article I of the Declaration).

June 3, 1974

Mr. Minister:

We have the honor to refer to Your Excellency's note of March 27, 1974 (OIA Nº 4958), in which the distinguished Government of Chile has kindly furnished information in connection with this Commission's note of October 24, 1973.

After careful examination of your note, the Commission, at its 32nd session, held in this city April 8-18, felt it necessary to request again that Your Excellency provide it additional information to enable it to reach solidly-based conclusions.

1. With respect to the list of 16 persons who are reported to have disappeared, Your Excellency states that “Thirteen of them either left the territory of the Republic voluntarily or were expelled from the country, because their presence, under legislation in force, constituted a serious threat against national security.”

However, Your Excellency's note refers only to 12 of these persons, and indicates only that they are “outside the country.”

It would be desirable for this Commission's work, to know which ones left the country voluntarily and which ones were expelled, indicating for the latter the reasons for their expulsion, and enclosing copies of the respective decisions. The Commission would also like to know whether the foreigners expelled were returned to their country of origin.

With regard to the case of Mr. Tulio Quintiliano Cardoso, who disappeared “despite a full investigation of the case, as reported by the Ministry of National Defense,” we would appreciate if if Your Excellency would furnish us copies of the steps taken by that Ministry on this case. Similarly, in connection with Gonzalo Vergal, we would appreciate knowing whether an administrative or judicial investigation has taken place.

With regard to the case of Mr. Charles Horman, a United States citizen, with respect to whom Your Excellency reports that “he was found shot to death on a public thoroughfare on the morning of September 18, 1973,” we request that Your Excellency be so kind as to furnish us additional evidence on this event, and particularly, a copy of the documents certifying removal of the cadaver or of any other document signed by the authorities who may have taken cognizance of this event. The Commission also wishes to know whether the investigation has terminated, and if so, what authority was in charge of it.

Finally, with regard to the list of 16 persons, we call to Your Excellency's attention that, in the communication of March 27, we were not given any information at all regarding Mr. Federico Vaires, a Salvadoran student of the University of Santiago, who was arrested and taken to the TACNA regiment headquarters, and disappeared. For that reason we again request that the following information regarding this person be supplied: where he is; in what state of health; whether he has been deprived of his liberty, and if so, where; whether he has been brought to trial, indicating the judge or court; the charges that were brought against him; whether he was defense counsel and if so, the name and address of his counsel.

2. Of the twelve persons included in this group, regarding whom the Commission received reports that they had died, Your Excellency reports the death of Dr. Jorge Ríos Dalens (Bolivian); Sócrates Ponce Pacheco (Ecuadoran); Litré Quiroga (Chilean); and Víctor Jara (Chilean).

Regarding these persons, the Commission wishes to know the following:

a. What authority is in charge of the investigation of the cause of the death of Dr. Ríos Dalens and the status of the investigation.

b. Whether the death of Mr. Litré Quiroga, an official of the overthrown government, is under investigation and in charge of what authority and whether the “common criminals” who allegedly committed the act, have now been brought to justice.

c. In the case of the above-mentioned persons and in the case of Sócrates Ponce Pacheco and Víctor Jara, we ask that Your Excellency submit to us documents certifying the removal of the cadavers, signed by the competent authorities and the results of the autopsies.

d. With respect to Jorge Sergio Alegría Higuera, Luis Eleuterio Maldonado Gallardo, Miguel Hernán Moreno Caviedes, Sergio Emilio Aguilar Núñez, Alvaro Javier Acuña, Miguel Zaldívar Arriagada, Carlos René León Morales, and José Oscar Machuca Espinosa, the Commission wishes to know what authorities are in charge of the investigations of their cases. We appreciate Your Excellency's offer to send the Commission, as soon as possible, information establishing the status of these persons.

3. With respect to persons allegedly subjected to torture or to maltreatment, Your Excellency has supplied information with respect to the present status of Margarita Echeverría (Chilean), Dr. Ricardo Elena (Uruguayan), Flora Espinosa Díaz (Chilean), Felipe Iñigas (Bolivian), Delbo Ignacio da Silva (Uruguayan) and Claudio Weber Ubilla (Chilean), indicating whether they are outside the country or released. Consequently, the Commission wishes to know regarding these persons whether the maltreatment or the tortures referred to in the denunciations have been proven and whether, if so, procedures have been instituted to determine the persons responsible and to impose appropriate punishment.

4. Regarding the cases of Samuel Pasik (Argentine), Ignacio Miashira (Bolivian) and Raúl Irene Estrada (Mexican), who were detained in the National Stadium and regarding whom Your Excellency reports that they are outside the country, we request additional information on whether these persons left the country voluntarily or were expelled, and if so, we request copies of the relevant decisions.

In addition, we request that Your Excellency inform us whether in the cares of Manuel Vázquez and Soledad Urzía Pérez (Chileans), investigations were conducted to ascertain their whereabouts and their status. With respect to Laura Martínez Silva, imprisoned September 27 in the National Stadium and María Elena Gallardo, imprisoned October 10 in the same place, we call Your Excellency's attention to the fact that in your communication of March 27, no information at all is furnished on these individuals, and we therefore again ask that you provide us any information you deem relevant.

With regard to María Emilia Tijoux, imprisoned September 27 in the National Stadium, concerning whom Your Excellency reports that she is “detained in the Women's House of Correction, indicted by a regular court” and that “the inquest is being conducted by Judge Izurieta, of the Court of Appeals of Santiago”, we would appreciate it if Your Excellency would inform us of the crime of which she is accused and the status of the case.

The Commission appreciates the readiness of the distinguished Government of Chile and of Your Excellency, in particular, to supply the information that we have requested and we understand the difficulties indicated by Your Excellency with respect to obtaining the data that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights requires for its examination of the denunciations that have been made to it and to fulfill its mandate to promote the observance of human rights in the American states.

Accept, Excellency, assurances of our highest consideration.

Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman

Luis Reque

Executive Secretary

His Excellency Admiral Ismael Huerta Diaz

Minister of Foreign Relations

Santiago, Chile

Republic of Chile

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Nº 10348

Santiago, June 26, 1974

Mr. Chairman:

I have the honor to reply to your note of June 3, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights requests additional information to that sent by my government on March 27.

In this regard, I must respond to part of your request by informing you that, as soon as my Ministry obtains the information on the other parts of your request, I will submit it to you for your information and that of the Commission over which you preside:

1. Luis Carlos de Almeida. Brazilian. Was granted asylum in the Embassy of Sweden. Traveled on November 16, 1973, to Stockholm.

2. Roberto Metzer Thomas, Brazilian. Was expelled from the country and traveled, through the CIME, to Sweden on November 7, 1973.

3. Antonio José Barros. Brazilian. Was expelled from the country and traveled, through the CIME, to Sweden on January 3, 1974.

4. Antonio Moreno. Bolivian. Was expelled from the country and traveled, through the CIME, to Sweden on January 3, 1974.

5. Luis Velez. Bolivian. Was expelled from the country and traveled, through the CIME, on November 4, 1973.

6. Carlos Toranzos. Bolivian. Was granted asylum in the Mexican Embassy, and traveled to Mexico City under a safe conduct issued by my Government.

7. Julio Baraibar. Uruguayan. Was expelled from the country and traveled, through the Swedish Embassy, to Stockholm on October 30, 1973.

8. Miguel Angel Ortiz Suárez. Uruguayan. Was expelled from the country and traveled through the Swedish Embassy to Stockholm on October 30, 1973.

9. Dr. Marquez Rogalino. Traveled in the first week of October to Ecuador.

10. Dr. Rafael de León. Guatemalan. Expelled from the country. Traveled, through the CIME, to the Federal Republic of Germany on January 1, 1974.

11. Luis Alvarado. Chilean. Was granted asylum in the Mexican Embassy, and traveled to Mexico City on October 13, 1973.

12. Jorge Sabogal. Colombian. Was expelled from the country. Traveled, through the CIME, to Colombia on December 21, 1973.

13. Samuel Pasik. Argentine. Was expelled from the country. Traveled to Buenos Aires on November 20, 1973.

14. Ignacio Miashira. Bolivian. Was expelled from the country. Traveled, through the CIME, to Sweden on November 11, 1973.

15. Raúl Irena Estrada. Mexican. Was expelled from the country. Traveled, through the CIME, to Sweden on November 11, 1973.

I take this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to express assurances of my highest consideration.

Ismael Huerta Díaz

Vice Admiral

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile

Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman of the Inter-American Commission

on Human Rights

Washington, D.C.

Republic of Chile

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Santiago, July 5, 1974

OIA Nº 11098

Mr. Chairman:

I again refer to your note of June 3, in which you request that information be submitted to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the status of various persons.

Having obtained additional information to that of my note of June 26, I now submit it to the Commission over which you preside. The case of Antonio Federico Baires. He was imprisoned in the National Stadium and later expelled from the country. He went to El Salvador on November 30, 1973.

With regard to the inquiry in point 3 of your communication of June 3, on individuals allegedly subjected to torture or maltreatment, I can tell you that no denunciation by those persons has been received in the civil, criminal or military courts. The Chilean legal penal system classified as crimes, in articles 255 and 397, the actions denounced in your communication, and the means to activate the judicial mechanism is through the procedures contained in the Code of Penal Procedures, none of which have ever been repealed.

This country respects the rights and freedom of those living or present in Chile, and if situations such as those described are denounced through appropriate channels, our judicial system will, as always, investigate the facts, and if it is found that there are persons responsible, the penalties provided by law will be imposed on them.

Accept, Mr. Chairman, assurances of my highest consideration.

Ismael Huerta Díaz

Vice Admiral

Minister of Foreign Affairs

To

Mr. Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman of the Inter-American Commission

on Human Rights

Washington, D.C.

9. However, in April, 1974, the Commission agreed, after carefully examining all of the documents on the matter, that, while some denunciations on individual cases might be clarified through an exchange of notes with the Government of Chile, no decision on the general situation, that is to say, on the repeated denunciations that serious and massive violations of human rights occurred in Chile, could be adopted without resorting to the procedure of examination “in loco” of the situation, as provided for in Article 50 of the Regulations.

Pursuant to that decision, a note was sent to the Government of Chile, dated April 18, 1974, reading as follows:

Excellency:

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has followed with much attention the unfolding of events that have occurred in the Republic of Chile since September 11, 1973, analyzing them in relation with the effective operation and protection of human rights.

This interest has been made manifest by the frequency with which we have corresponded with the Government of Your Excellency since that date in fulfillment of the obligations imposed upon us by the clear standards which govern our activity.

We have already had the opportunity to acknowledge formally—and we are pleased to repeat it on this occasion—that the Government of Your Excellency has endeavored to offer ample information on the majority of the questions which the Commission has formulated. Likewise, we expressly acknowledge the facilities accorded to the Executive Secretary of the Commission during his visit in mid-October 1973.

During this session, the study of the present situation of human rights in Chile has taken a great part of our time. On the one hand, we have examined those individual cases, clearly determinable, in which the violation of certain fundamental rights of one or several specified persons has been denounced. But, in addition, it has been necessary to analyze separately that which we might call a “general case,” that is, the aggregation of charges from different sources according to which there is a policy in Chile which would imply, according to the claimants, the systematic disregard of fundamental human rights.

The Commission still lacks important evidence that would permit it to form a definitive opinion on many of the individual cases under examination; but it is especially in relation to that which we call a “general case” that greater contradictions appear—still insolvable by us—between the allegations of the claimants and the information furnished by the Government of Your Excellency.

The imperative necessity to carry out the duties that the American states have imposed on the Commission in approving its Statute, leads us in this case, after a very careful consideration of the surrounding circumstances, to exercise the faculty conferred by Article 11 of the Statute and Article 50 of the Regulations, precepts that, constituting one of the normal means by which we do our work, foresee that we might request authorization of a government in order to examine in its territory the situation of human rights, for the purposes contemplated in Article 150 of the Charter of the Organization of American States, amended by the Protocol of Buenos Aires of 1967 and Article 9 (bis) b of the Statute of the Commission.

The Commission believes that only by working in such a manner can it take a decision with full knowledge of the facts with respect to the situation of human rights in Chile, whether it be to recommend the measures that it deems necessary for their complete protection or whether it be to be able to affirm, on the other hand, that the violations denounced did not take place.

The ample understanding shown to date by the Government of Your Excellency leads us to believe that the request for authorization will be granted and, in such case, we wish to say in advance that the Commission considers that next June 1st would be the best date for commencing its work.

Awaiting decision on this request, I repeat, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.

(s) Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman

His Excellency

Rear Admiral Ismael Huerta Díaz

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Santiago, Chile

This note, as indicated expressly in its text, constitutes the broadest and most absolute recognition of the incontrovertible right of the Government of Chile to grant or deny the consent requested of it. The Commission therefore conformed to the precise terms of the standards then in force, notwithstanding which our communication gave rise to certain erroneous interpretations.

10. The Government of Chile, through the Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, replied by cable dated May 15, that, since the Chairman of the military Junta and the Minister of Foreign Affairs were outside the country, he considered it preferable to await their return before giving a specific reply to our note, but stated that the date indicated by us seemed somewhat premature. The text of the cable is as follows:

Mr. Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga

Chairman of the Inter-American Commission

on Human Rights

Washington, D.C.

The Ambassador of Chile to the OAS advised me yesterday of the text of a note, dated April 18, that you had sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile, Vice Admiral Ismael Huerta, a note which, to this moment, has not been received in this Department of State. This leads me to respond by cable to that communication.

In view of the fact that the President of the Government Junta and the Minister of Foreign Affairs are currently in Paraguay and that the latter will make an official visit to Argentina immediately afterwards, I prefer to await the return of both before giving a concrete response to your petition that the Commission on Human Rights travel to Chile. But, of course, I can say in advance that the date suggested by you of the first of June is somewhat premature due to the aforementioned circumstances.

Very truly yours,

Patricio Carvajal

Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile

Santiago de Chile

May 15, 1974

On May 16, we replied as follows:

IN RESPONSE TO CABLEGRAM YOUR EXCELLENCY OF 15 OF THIS MONTH, FORWARDED BY CHILEAN DELEGATION TO THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS SINCERELY REGRETS THAT YOUR EXCELLENCY’S GOVERNMENT CONSIDERS, FOR THE CIRCUMSTANCES INDICATED IN YOUR AFOREMENTIONED CABLEGRAM, THAT THE DATE OF FIRST OF JUNE SUGGESTED BY THIS COMMISSION TO MEET IN TERRITORY OF CHILE WITH THE OBJECT OF CONTINUING ITS EXAMINATION OF THE SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS “IS SOMEWHAT PREMATURE.” COMMISSION IN EXERCISE ITS IRREVOCABLE MANDATE TO WATCH OVER OBSERVANCE HUMAN RIGHTS, AND IN VIEW OF THE SERIOUSNESS AND URGENCY OF THE ACTS DENOUNCED, HOLDS TO ITS FIRM INTENTION TO VISIT CHILE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO STUDY IN LOCO DENUNCIATIONS WHICH ALLEGE VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, ESPECIALLY RIGHT TO LIFE, LIBERTY AND PERSONAL SECURITY, RIGHT OF PROTECTION FROM ARBITRARY ARREST, AS WELL AS RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW, SET FORTH IN ARTICLES I, XXV AND XXVI OF THE AMERICAN DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF MAN APPROVED IN THE CONFERENCE OF BOGOTÁ WITH THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF CHILE. WE WISH TO EXPRESS ANEW TO YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN LIGHT OF ARTICLE 42 REGULATIONS COMMISSION REQUEST OF AUTHORIZATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A JUDGMENT IN ADVANCE ADMISSIBILITY OF DENUNCIATIONS. AWAITING DEFINITIVE DECISION BY YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT ON AUTHORIZATION REQUEST, ACCEPT EXCELLENCY ASSURANCES HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

JUSTINO JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉCHAGA

CHAIRMAN IACHR

LUIS REQUE

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

11. On May 22, that is to say, six days after the Commission cabled its reply, it issued a press release (Nº 17, as follows:

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, during its thirty second session, held April 8-18, 1974 in Washington, D.C., in view of the number and seriousness of the denunciations of alleged violations of human rights that it had received in relation to Chile and in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Commission, decided to request of the Government of Chile the authorization necessary to meet in that country and thus obtain additional information on the cases denounced.

To that end, the Chairman of the Commission, Dr. Justino Jiménez de Aréchaga, sent the following note, dated April 18, 1974, to the Government of Chile:1

By way of reply, the Government of Chile, through its Representative to the OAS, sent the following cablegram on May 15 to the Commission:2

In turn, the Chairman of the Commission, reaffirming the desire of the Commission to visit Chile in light of the situation there, responded as follows on May 16, 1974:3

There was great interest in the press to know the status of these actions, as expressed at the last OAS General Assembly, and it was therefore deemed desirable to issue this press release so that any information published on this matter would be true and objective. The Commission has proceeded in the same way in similar cases.

12. On May 23, 1974, the Government of Chile sent its reply, signed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The Commission received the reply on the 24th. The note expressed the Chilean Government's assent regarding the Commission's request that it be granted the consent required by Article 11 of the Statute and Article 50 of our Regulations. It thus accepts the Commission's competence to request such consent and exercises the Government's power to grant or deny it. The text is as follows:

On returning to my post after official visits to the Argentine Republic and Paraguay, I have learned of exchange of communications between Acting Minister and you.

I cannot fail to express to you my surprise at text of cable dated May 16, in which you state that Commission you head “holds to its firm intention to visit Chile as soon as possible to study in loco denunciations which allege violations of human rights.” You seem to forget, that in order to do such, in accordance with both the Statute and the Regulations of the Commission, the prior consent of the Government of Chile is required.

You also seem to forget the terms of your own earlier communication of April 18, in which you expressly recognize that my government has sent ample information on the majority of the inquiries made by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and likewise recognize the facilities granted to the Executive Secretary thereof during his visit to Chile at the end of last year.

Nevertheless, and in consideration of the work carried out by the Commission, I have no objection to granting the consent of my government for the Commission to go to Chile, provided the date is previously agreed upon with my government.

That date could be during the course of the month of July, which would be an appropriate time for the undersigned, who wishes to receive the members of the Commission personally, as they should be received.

The period until then will be very useful for my government to be in a position to gather and provide to those making the visit the reports on the acts that have been denounced to the Commission and that make up what you call, in your communication of April 18, “the general case” of Chile, which, precisely because it is so generic, has not made it possible to see what are the antecedents that would justify the request of the Commission in accordance with its Statute and Regulations. It would, therefore, be necessary that, in accordance with those instruments, you specify at once the information that you need.

Sincerely yours,

Ismael Huerta

Vice Admiral

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile

Santiago, Chile

The note contains some passages that might have merited a reply by the Commission, but it was decided to overlook them. These passages sought to place the Commission in the false position of proposing to deny to the State to whom the request was made the right to grant or withhold consent for the conduct of an “in loco” investigation.

13. In order to maintain the highest level of cordiality in the Commission's relations with the Government of Chile, we replied to the Minister's communication in the following terms, without alluding to any of the questions referred to in the previous note:

HIS EXCELLENCY

VICE ADMIRAL ISMAEL HUERTA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SANTIAGO, CHILE

IN RESPONSE YOUR EXCELLENCY'S CABLEGRAM OF MAY 23, FORWARDED BY CHILEAN DELEGATION TO THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, WE WISH TO EXPRESS, IN NAME INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, SINCERE APPRECIATION YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT FOR AUTHORIZATION GRANTED SO THAT COMMISSION MIGHT VISIT CHILEAN TERRITORY TO CONTINUE EXAMINATION OF ALLEGED VIOLATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS. WE WISH TO EXPRESS TO YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT PURPOSE OF OUR CABLEGRAM OF MAY 16 WAS NONE OTHER THAN REQUEST AUTHORIZATION PROVIDED BY STATUTE AND REGULATIONS, WHICH HAD NOT BEEN FORGOTTEN BY THE COMMISSION. WITH RESPECT TO DATE PROPOSED BY YOUR EXCELLENCY, WE SHALL CONSULT MEMBERS OF COMMISSION IN ORDER TO GIVE ADEQUATE RESPONSE. WE SHALL SOON REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THAT SUBMITTED BY YOUR EXCELLENCY BY DOCUMENT Nº 4958 OF LAST MARCH 27. WE REPEAT, EXCELLENCY, ASSURANCES OF OUR HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

JUSTINO JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉCHAGA

CHAIRMAN

LUIS REQUE

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

14. In order to coordinate the visit of the Commission, the Chairman sent the following cablegram to the Government of Chile on May 28:

HIS EXCELLENCY

VICE ADMIRAL ISMAEL HUERTA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SANTIAGO, CHILE

IN ORDER TO ARRANGE IN CONCURRENCE WITH YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT DATE FOR COMMISSION'S VISIT TO CHILE I REQUEST THAT YOUR EXCELLENCY AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF COMMISSION TO VISIT SANTIAGO. SINCERELY YOURS,

JUSTINO JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉCHAGA

CHAIRMAN

IACHR

15. The Executive Secretary visited Santiago, Chile, after meeting in Montevideo with the Chairman of the Commission, to reach agreement on all of the details for the visit and the assistance that would be required from the Government of Chile, especially to be able to visit freely all of the locations that were indicated as being used for the detention of persons, to interrogate prisoners, to examine files, etc.

Finally, July 22 was set as the date for beginning the visit.

Notes____________________

1 See the text of the note on Page 54.

2 See the text of note on Page 56.

3 Ibid.