REPORT No. 58/16
PETITIONS 1275-04 B AND 1566-08
REPORT ON ADMISSIBILITY
JUAN LUIS RIVERA MATUS ET AL.
CHILE
DECEMBER 6, 2016
I.
SUMMARY
1.
On January 28, 2008, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, the
“Inter-American Commission,” “Commission,” or “IACHR”) received a petition lodged by Corporación
Agrupación de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos (hereinafter, “AFDD”), and a group of lawyers 1
(hereinafter, “the petitioners”) against Chile (hereinafter, “Chile” or “the State”), on behalf of Mr. Juan Luis
Rivera Matus (hereinafter, “the alleged victim” or “Mr. Rivera”) and his family. Subsequently, the Commission
received 13 more complaints, presented by the same petitioners and the International Federation for Human
Rights, in respect of which they requested that the petition be expanded. The complaints—14 in all—were
submitted on behalf of the families of 48 individuals, so as to incorporate other alleged victims, who the
petitions say are victims of crimes against humanity, inasmuch as they were political detainees who were
disappeared or executed under the Chilean military dictatorship (hereinafter, "the alleged victims"). The
complaints allege that the State of Chile bears international responsibility for violation of rights recognized at
Articles 1 (obligation to ensure rights), 8 (right to a fair trial), and 25 (right to judicial protection) of the
American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter, the "American Convention" or "Convention"), to the
detriment of the alleged victims and their families.
2.
In the above complaints, the petitioners argue that the State's responsibility was engaged by
judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in the context of the criminal investigations into the events that
harmed the alleged victims during the Chilean military dictatorship. They say that said tribunal applied the
concept of “partial lapse of the statutory time period” (media prescripción) or “partial statutory limitations”
(prescripción gradual) recognized in Article 103 of the Criminal Code. The application of that concept in the
cases meant that the penalty imposed did not meet the standards of proportionality and pertinence or the
purpose of comprehensive reparation that punishment in such cases is supposed to achieve. They say that in
Chile the investigation and punishment of crimes against humanity is governed by the legislative statute on
ordinary crimes and that the Court does not provide reasons for its decisions in granting the benefit of a
mitigating factor such as partial statutory limitation to those responsible for crimes which, owing to their
nature, are not covered by a statute of limitations. They also say that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to
act as a trial court, as occurred in these cases, which precluded the victims presenting their arguments to said
tribunal, thereby depriving them of the possibility of a hearing and recourse against the decision.
3.
The State, for its part, says that it has no objections in terms of the petition’s compliance with
the formal requirements of admissibility.
4.
Having examined the positions of the parties and compliance with the requirements set forth
in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention, without prejudging the merits of the complaint, the
Commission has decided to declare the petition admissible for the purposes of examination of alleged violations
of rights recognized in Articles 5 (right to humane treatment), 8 (right to a fair trial), and 25 (right to judicial
protection) of the American Convention, taken in conjunction with Articles 1(1) (obligation to respect rights)
and 2 (obligation to adopt provisions under domestic law) of that treaty. The Commission has further decided
to notify the parties of this decision, to publish it, and to include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General
Assembly.
1 Loreto Meza van den Daele, Boris Paredes Bustos, Karina Fernández Neira, Cristián Cruz Rivera, Magdalena Garcés Fuentes,
José Antonio Guerrero Uriarte, Joseph Bereaud Barraza, María Cecilia Noguer Fernández, and Luisa Carolina Sanhueza Gómez.
1