I.
SUMMARY
REPORT No. 53/15 1
PETITION 706-04
ADMISSIBILITY
MARIO GALETOVIC SAPUNAR ET AL.
CHILE
OCTOBER 17, 2015
1.
On July 21, 2004, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the
Commission” or the “IACHR”) received a petition from Mario Galetovic Sapunar (hereinafter “the petitioner”),
alleging the international responsibility of the State of Chile (hereinafter “the State” or “Chile”) for the violation of
Articles 13 (freedom of expression), 21 (right to property) and 25 (judicial protection) of the American
Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter the “American Convention” or the “Convention”) to his detriment
and to the detriment of Daniel Ruiz Oyarzo, Carlos González Jaksic, Oscar Santiago Mayorga Paredes, Hugo René
Formantel Díaz, and Nestor Edmundo Navarro Alvarado (hereinafter “the alleged victims”).
2.
This petition is related to the January 21, 2004 decision in which the Chilean Supreme Court
denied the alleged victims—based on the time-barring of the civil action by the statute of limitations—access
to financial reparations to compensate them for the actions taken against them following the coup of September
11, 1973. According to the petitioner, the civil action he filed in 1995 sought to reverse the effects of the decrees
issued by the de facto government ordering the dissolution and closure of the petitioner’s radio station La Voz
del Sur, as well as the confiscation of the radio station’s assets and facilities, “in order to silence political
dissidence.” The petitioner alleged that the Court’s decision violated his right of access to effective justice, and
“not only deprived him of his right to property” but also prevented his “opinion from once again being
communicated” through fair reparations once democracy was restored in his country.
3.
For its part, the State maintained that this petition should be declared inadmissible because it
concerns events that occurred prior to the date on which the State deposited its Ratification Instrument, and
that began prior to March 11, 1990. According to the State, this case would fall within one of the limitations
imposed by the Government of Chile upon recognizing jurisdiction; that is, it would be time-restricted. It also
asserts that “in acknowledging the competence and jurisdiction of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Government of Chile declares that, when these
bodies apply the provisions of Article 21.2 of the Convention, they may not make statements concerning the
reasons of public utility or social interest taken into account in depriving a person of his property.”
4.
After examining the positions of the parties in light of the admissibility requirements
established in Articles 46 and 47 of the Convention, as well as Articles 30 and 36 of the IACHR’s Rules of
Procedure, and without prejudging the merits of the case, the IACHR decided to declare the petition admissible
with respect to the alleged violation of Articles 8 (right to a fair trial), 13 (freedom of expression), 21 (right to
property) and 25 (judicial protection) of the American Convention, in light of the general obligations enshrined
in Articles 1.1 and 2 thereof. Finally, the Commission decided to give notice to the parties, publish this report,
and include it in its Annual Report to the General Assembly of the Organization of American States.
II.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION
5.
The petition was received by the IACHR on July 21, 2004. On December 22, 2004, the IACHR
forwarded the pertinent parts of the petition to the State, requesting the submission of its reply within two
months. On February 16, 2005, the State submitted its reply to this petition, the pertinent parts of which were
forwarded to the petitioner on March 15, 2005.
1 Commissioner Felipe González, a Chilean citizen, did not take part in the deliberations or in the decision related to this petition,
in accordance with Article 17.2.a of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.
1