36 63(41) On March 31, 1993, the Chief of Garrison IM “Orden y Seguridad” (“Order and Security”) (M) went to the Hospital of the Armed Forces where PalamaraIribarne “was being medically treated for his nervous condition” and told him that “the comments he made to the media amounted to a manifest disobedience of the above-mentioned order” (supra para. 63(38)).79 That same day, the Garrison Chief forwarded a report to the Commander in Chief of the Third Naval Zone, whereby he pointed out that “on page 10 of La Prensa Austral newspaper, of Punta Arenas, there is an article [… where Palamara-Iribarne] asserts to have been discriminated by the [Naval] Institution, in violation of the order” delivered on March 26, 1993 (supra para. 63(38)), and that he had skipped “the claim procedure outlined under the Ordinance of the Navy.”80 63(42) On April 2, 1993, Palamara-Iribarne appeared before the Naval Prosecutor of Magallanes and stated, inter alia, that he was not acquainted with the reasons for such request and that the comments he made to the journalists of “La Prensa Austral” newspaper did not constitute criticism against the Navy “because he was only refer[ing] to an event that actually occurred, which does not amount to classified information.”81 That same day, the Naval Prosecutor of Magallanes ordered the journalist who authored the above-mentioned article (supra para. 63(40)) to appear before his office, and the latter also stated that he ignored the reasons for such request.82 63(43) On April 13, 1993, the attorney for Palamara-Iribarne filed a brief whereby he requested “restitution of all copies” of the book on behalf of his client because, during the preliminary investigation, the prosecution “failed to prove the occurrence of an event that may adversely affect the interests of the Navy or jeopardize national security,” the above-mentioned individual did not disclose secrets about the Navy, and the crimes of disobedience and breach of military duties charged upon him did not justify “upholding [said] seizure.” Moreover, he asserted that said measure 79 Cf. Statement of the Chief of Garrison IM “Orden y Seguridad” (“Order and Security”) rendered before the Naval Prosecutor of Magallanes on March 31, 1993, and statement of Humberto Antonio Palamara-Iribarne of April 2, 1993, rendered before the Naval Prosecutor (Case No. 464 before the Naval Court of Magallanes on the crimes of disobedience and breach of military duties, appendixes to the complaint, volume III, appendix 9(a), pages 1063 and 1076). 80 Cf. Report on “disobedience committed by civil servant hired as contractor” Humberto Antonio Palamara-Iribarne by the Chief of Garrison IM “Orden y Seguridad” (“Order and Security”) of March 31, 1993 (Case No. 464 before the Naval Court of Magallanes on the crimes of disobedience and breach of military duties, appendixes to the complaint, volume III, appendix 9(a), page 1055). 81 Cf. Statement rendered by Humberto Antonio Palamara-Iribarne on April 2, 1993, before the Naval Prosecutor of Magallanes (Case No. 464 before the Naval Court of Magallanes on the crimes of disobedience and breach of military duties, appendixes to the complaint, volume III, appendix 9(a), page 1075). 82 Cf. Order of the Naval Prosecutor of April 2, 1993; and statement rendered by journalist Poly Rain on April 5, 1993, before the Naval Prosecutor of Magallanes (Case No. 464 before the Naval Court of Magallanes on the crimes of disobedience and breach of military duties, appendixes to the complaint, volume III, appendix 9(a), folios 1079 y 1080).