21 to judicially take over the case. She testified before the Comisión Nacional de Verdad y Reconciliación (National Truth and Reconciliation Commission), and the account of her husband’s extra-legal execution and his name appear in the final report issued by the Commission. She has received a pension from the Chilean State since 1992. Before she started receiving her pension, she survived “doing sewing jobs at [her] home, and thanks to the aid of many people who helped [her] at that time.” Her current income is “just enough for her to get by, since [she has] a very ill health.” Two of their three children received student grants and have become professionals. In addition, they use the free health care card in the public health system. She has not been able to use the card, “not because it is no good for [her], but because [her] health is so poor” that she “must rely on whatever assistance [she] can get the earliest.” However, she believes that “[she] will eventually need it and [she is] willing to use it when the time comes.” As a symbolic reparation measure, her husband’s name is included in the memorial of the victims of the repression of the military dictatorship set up in the general cemetery; in addition, there is a street and a village called “Luis Almonacid” in the city of Rancagua. She expects the Inter-American Court to “do justice, [...] vindicate the memory of [her] husband, and carry out a fair trial […], for as long as […] justice is served, no one else will have to suffer what [she] went through.” In addition, she stated that she wishes “that [Decree]Law No. 2.191 were repealed, thus showing that the amnesty law is no good.” b) Statement of Jorge Correa-Sutil, witness proposed by the State In his opinion, “the policies of the democratic government from 1990 to the present have been mostly aimed at two goals, namely, to deter future human rights violations and to make reparations to the victims.” “To that end, the first important measure […] was the creation of the Comisión Nacional de Verdad y Reconciliación (National Truth and Reconciliation Commission), [which made] an express account of each of those persons as victims, which was later completed by a second commission, i.e. the Corporación Nacional de Reparación y Reconciliación (National Reparation and Reconciliation Corporation), between 1992 and 1996, identifying approximately over 3,000 victims. The Chilean State through the legislative power solemnly established the right of each of the victims to know the truth and the fate of detained-disappeared persons and of the executed persons whose bodies were never delivered, and provided for a series of reparation measures. Perhaps most importantly, [the Truth Commission] issued a Report, which meant introducing into the public opinion the possibility of a social condemnation of acts that had been denied or grossly distorted by the military government such as the deaths and disappearances. The honor of those who had died, disappeared or gone into exile, which had been marred by accusations of terrorism, was restored, or at least that was meant to be done.” As regards each of them, reparation measures were taken, including life pensions for their widows, student grants for the victims’ next of kin […] and other kinds of measures concerning health and exemption from mandatory military service for the children of the victim’s next of kin. Likewise, the State was compelled to further the remembrance of these cases through memorials or other ways to recall the events and channel social condemnation.”