I - INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On August 7, 2011, in accordance with Articles 51 and 61 of the American Convention and Article 35 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court the case of “Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Víctor Ancalaf Llaupe et al. (Lonkos,2 leaders and activists of the Mapuche indigenous people) with regard to the Republic of Chile” (hereinafter, “the State” or “Chile”). According to the Commission the case refers to the alleged “violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 8(1), 8(2), 8(2)(f), 8(2)(h), 9, 13, 23 and 24 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to the obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán, Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao, Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán, Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles and Víctor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe, owing to their prosecution and conviction for terrorist offenses, in application of a criminal law that was inconsistent with the principle of legality, and also involved a series of irregularities that affected due process, including unjustified and discriminatory consideration of their ethnic origin.” According to the Commission, the case took place against “a well-known backdrop of selective implementation of anti-terrorist legislation to the detriment of members of the Mapuche indigenous people in Chile.” 2. Proceedings before the Commission. The proceedings before the Commission were as follows: a) Petitions. This case includes four petitions3 that, at the explicit request of the State, the Commission decided jointly in Merits Report 176/10.4 The petitions were as follows: i. Petition presented on August 15, 2003, by Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán, represented by the lawyers Jaime Madariaga De la Barra and Rodrigo Lillo Vera (Case 12,576, Petition No. 619/03). ii. Petition presented the same day by Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao (with the same case and petition numbers as the previous petition). iii. Petition presented on April 13, 2005, by Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán and Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles (Case 12,611, Petition No. 429/05). iv. Petition presented on May 20, 2005, by 69 leaders of the Mapuche indigenous people and by the lawyers Ariel León Bacian, Sergio Fuenzalida Bascuñán and José Alywin Oyarzún, on behalf of Víctor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe (Case 12,612, Petition No. 581/05). b) Admissibility Reports. On October 21, 2006, and May 2, 2007, the Commission approved Admissibility Reports No. 89/06 (Petition No. 619/03), No. 32/07 (Petition No. 429/05) and No. 33/07 (Petition No. 581/05), in which it determined that it was competent to examine the claims presented by the petitioners with regard to the presumed violations of Articles 8, 9 and 24 of the Convention, in relation to the general obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 2 “Lonkos” are the highest traditional authorities of the Mapuche communities. See infra para. 78. 3 Cf. Petition 619-03 Aniceto Norín Catrimán and Pascual Pichún Paillalao; Petition 429-05 Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán and Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán, and Petition 581-05 Víctor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe and other Mapuche leaders (file of annexes to the Merits Report 176/10, appendix 1, folios 96 to 126, 1734 to 1775 and 2536 to 2578). 4 Cf. Merits Report No. 176/10, Case of Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Víctor Ancalaf Llaupe et al. v. Chile, November 5, 2010 (merits file, tome I, folios 9 to 109). 4