The trespass is a crime that is to issue a ruling against special law. If that happens in our courts and those affected are in uniform or, as crime goes unpunished.
But everything has its limit and there are things so unusual that sometimes even give shame to the Supreme Court, which is not likely to happen.
In a loose chronicle of "El Mercurio reports briefly today:" Supreme Court ruling annulled if Rahue III. " Rahu is in the area of \u200b\u200bValdivia, where it operated, and can say that he ruled, "Commander Pepe" protected guerrilla leader of the Popular Unity.
Between September and October 1973 a group of 24 police arrested 31 people, obviously not having been cultivating the land or developing peaceful activities such as pharmacists, teachers and dentists, but for its commitment to groups practicing violence and had ravaged the area.
The detainees were executed.
As the facts were covered by the amnesty of 1978 and also by prescription in 1994 the Court of Appeals of Valdivia, with the vote of the Minister Emma Diaz Yévenes, acquitted the police.
It turns out that in 2005, eleven years later, the same judge was appointed as Minister with special dedication to investigate the same case. And although she had dismissed, and in 2005 added to the amnesty and prescribing the grounds of res judicata, that can not return to prosecute individuals for certain facts that have already been judged by them, the minister Emma Diaz Yévenes, aware that in Chile, in the cases against soldiers, was no so-called rule of law, ie not prevailing laws, had no difficulty in changing their opinions. Thus ended the 24 police condemned to prison terms ranging from four years' imprisonment to life imprisonment.
But the case reached the Supreme Court and this has been resolved now that I worked for Mrs. Emma is a bit "too much ", even for the Chilean judiciary. Well, she not only was contradicting everything that was discussed in 1994 as a sentencing, not only was trampling jeopardy, but was incurring additional lack, fail in a cause that already expressed an opinion, which set her on an implication, ie, an inability to decide this matter, in accordance with Article 195 number 8 of the Organic Code of Tribunals.
So it all over again! What took from 2005 to 2011 to solve, start again from folio one (not square one, as the Chileans say, because there is no square one.) appointing a new judge and in 2017 we again discussing the case of Rahue III. Unless the new judge appointed to implement the laws and finally discontinued, but no one believes in a case against uniformed as to implement the laws.
What happened between 1994 and 2005 that swung 180 degrees to the Minister Díaz Yévenes? As the facts have not changed, nor the laws and the parties at trial were the same. So why the minister changed? Because there was a political change: the left "took" the judiciary and failed to enforce laws that prevent revenge on the military. But everything, even the outrage of the laws and revenge, has its limits, and that is what has made the Supreme Court established.
She wanted us to say that up to prevaricate is to observe a minimum of formality.
0 comments:
Post a Comment