prisoners and torture victims" in the Valech report. That law specifies that the pension "will be incompatible with those granted under Laws 19.234, 19.582 and 19.881, and persons in such situation may opt for one of these benefits in the manner determined by the corresponding regulation. 17. In August 1993, the Chilean Congress approved Law 19.234 ("Program to Recognize Politically Exonerated Persons"). The petition claims that on December 23, 1993, Mr. Garcia submitted an application under that program, with the required documentation, and that he added a letter outlining his particular situation, explaining in detail the torture that he had suffered and the disabilities that this had produced. In December 1994 Mr. Garcia received a letter acknowledging receipt of his application and requesting additional documentation to demonstrate that he has been dismissed on political grounds. On August 19, 1995, Mr. Garcia received a letter informing him that he was recognized as "politically exonerated". On February 13, 1996, Mr. Garcia received a further communication advising him that he would not receive a compensatory pension ("noncontributory pension"), but merely an additional time bonus (abono por tiempo de gracia) for his retirement, covering a period of eight months, even though he was dismissed in 1973. 18. According to the petition, Mr. Garcia was able to return to Santiago on a visit in 1998, and a friend working with the government helped him to submit his case under Law 19,582, which amended Law 19,234. In October 2000, Mr. Garcia received a letter confirming that he met the necessary conditions to obtain a "noncontributory pension". In January 2001, Mr. Garcia received a certificate awarding him a "noncontributory pension" in the ludicrous amount of $79,776 pesos a month (approximately £71 sterling). For Mr. Garcia, who had been expelled from Chile and was living in the United Kingdom, this amount was not only meaningless but made "a mockery of his suffering as a torture survivor who had been waiting for justice for more than 30 years in exile". 19. The petitioners maintain that this amount failed not only to recognize the amount of his lost savings and salaries, but also to take into account his disabled status. The torture he suffered not only affected his mobility but also his capacity to learn and his memory. Thus, although he has lived in the United Kingdom for 30 years, he has been unable to learn English and has had to rely on his wife to translate for him in matters ranging from day-to-day activities to the most complex affairs. Upon further inquiries he was advised that, while Law 19.234 and 19.582 did take into account mental or physical incapacity, the causes of such incapacity were not considered in determining the awards, and that the Ministry has discretionary powers to decide such matters. In May 2001, Mr. Garcia was advised by the Ministry of Social Services to seek further compensation through the Ministry of Justice, but he has not obtained an outcome favorable to this interests. 20. The petitioners explained in their submissions to the Commission that the object of their complaint "does not relate to violations of human rights flowing from the illegal detention, torture and expulsion of the petitioner as described in his complaint", but is focused on three questions: a) The non-repeal, and hence the continued validity, of Amnesty Law (Decree Law 2191), which the military government issued to amnesty itself, but which continues in effect and application during the democratic Government, even after Chile ratified the American Convention and assumed the commitment to comply with it. b) The failure to identify and prosecute those responsible, and to punish the perpetrators of the acts, which began during the military government and continue under the democratic and constitutional government; and c) The failure to make civil reparations for victims of torture and, until four months ago, to offer any official recognition and any possibility for administrative compensation. d) The facts alleged against the democratic Government relate, on one hand, to the failure to fulfill the obligations assumed by the State of Chile to adapt its domestic legislation to 4