from the website “http/fortunecety.es/,” which describes different activities related to the land claim movement that some of the members of the Mapuche ethnic group are carrying out in the eighth and ninth region of the country; the information contained in the report of the July 1, 2002, session of the Constitution, Legislation, Justice and Regulation Committee of the Senate of the Republic, which concluded with the finding of lack of service by the State; the information that has not been disproved and contained in part C, pages 10 and 11 of the edition of El Mercurio of March 10, 2002, on the number of conflicts caused by Mapuche groups by terrorist acts, online publications of La Tercera, La Segunda and El Mercurio, published on March 26, 1999, December 15, 2001, March 15 and June 15, 2002, respectively, and three tables taken from the webpage of the Chile’s Foreign Investment Committee, divided into sectors and by regions, based on the political and administrative division of the country, that allow comparisons to be made between dollars invested in the other regions and in the Ninth, and show that private investment in the region has decreased.252 *** […] Regarding the participation of both accused, the following must be considered: 1. As general background and from the evidence that the Public Prosecutor and the private accusers introduced at trial, it is a public and notorious fact that de facto organizations have existed within the area for some time that commit acts of violence or incite violence on the pretext of their territorial claims. Their modus operandi includes various acts of force targeted at the lumber businesses, smalland medium-size farmers, all of whom have one thing in common: they are owners of properties that are adjacent to, neighbor or are nearby indigenous communities that are asserting historical claims to those properties. The purpose of the measures is to reclaim lands that they believe are their ancestral lands. The illegal occupation of those lands is the means to accomplish the most ambitious goal. Through these actions, they believe they will gradually recover a portion of their ancestral territory and thereby strengthen the territorial identity of the Mapuche people. This is what the court learned from the testimony of victims Juan and Julio Sagredo Marin, Juan Agustin Figueroa Elgueta and Juan Agustin Figueroa Yávar, supported by the testimony of Armin Stappung Schwarzlose, Gerardo Jequier Salí, Jorge Pablo Luchsinger Villiger, Antonio Arnaldo Boisier Cruces and Osvaldo Moisés Carvajal Rondanelli, examined previously. 2. It has not been sufficiently established that these acts were caused by persons outside the Mapuche communities, since they were clearly intended to create a climate of harassment towards the property owners in the sector, in order to instill fear and make the owners accede to their demands. Their rationale relates to the so-called “Mapuche problem,” because the perpetrators knew the territory that was claimed and no Mapuche community or property has been harmed. 3. It has been established that the defendant, Pascual Pichú, is a Lonko of the “Antonio Ñirripil” community and Segundo Norín is a Lonko of the “Lorenzo Norín” community, and this means that they have authority within the community and some degree of leadership and control over it. 4. It should also be emphasized that the defendants Pichún and Norín have been convicted of other offenses related to land occupation committed prior to these events and against wooded properties located near their respective communities. This is revealed by case file No. 22,530 and joindered cases in which Pascual Pichún was sentenced to four years of medium-term rigorous imprisonment at the maximum level, and Segundo Norín to 800 days of medium-term rigorous imprisonment at the medium level and, in both cases, to the legal ancillary penalties and costs for the offense of [sic]. In addition, Pichún Paillalao was also sentenced to 41 days’ imprisonment at the maximum level and to the payment of a fine of 10 monthly tax units as perpetrator of the offense of driving under the influence. This is revealed from the respective extracts from his identity documents and record and from the copies of the final judgments duly certified and incorporated. 5. The Mapuche communities of Didaico and Temulemu adjoin the Nancahue forest farm, and 252 Thirteenth considerandum of the judgment delivered on September 27, 2003, convicting Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán and Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao. This passage is almost identical to one included in the previous judgment acquitting them, which was annulled (supra paras. 112 to 118); and to another passage contained in the nineteenth considerandum of the Judgment delivered on August 22, 2004, by the same court convicting Juan Patricio and Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán, and Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles in the criminal proceedings relating to the act of arson on the Poluco Pidenco property (supra para. 126). Cf. judgment delivered on September 27, 2003, by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court, thirteenth considerandum; judgment delivered on April 14, 2003, by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court, tenth considerandum, and judgment delivered on August 22, 2004, by Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court, second and nineteenth consideranda (file of annexes to the Merits Report 176/10, annex 15, 16 and 18, folios 537 to 540, 569 to 571, 679 and 680). 80