(38) Swiftness and priority. The necessary measures shall be adopted to avoid delays in processing each case, guaranteeing a prompt judicial resolution, as well as the fast execution of the resolution. When the circumstances of the situation of vulnerability so require, priority shall be given to the attention, resolution and execution of the case by the bodies of the system of justice. Case files shall be tagged with a visible mark so that processes affecting vulnerable people can be easily identified. 152. We can thus deduce that, in the case of people who are vulnerable such as the alleged victims in the instant case, who are all older persons (supra para. 125), a reinforced standard of expeditiousness can be demanded in judicial and administrative processes, including the execution of judgment. B.2.2. The process of executing labor judgments against the municipalities at the time of the facts 153. When public education in Chile was devolved to the municipalities, the teachers who worked for the Ministry of Public Education were transferred to the municipalities and, under the terms of Article 4 of decree-law No. 1-3,063, were made expressly subject to labor laws governing private sector workers. With respect to the execution of judgments, the labor code in force at the time of the events was subject to the applicable rules on enforcement contained in the Civil Procedural Code (hereinafter “CPC”).382 The problem, as explained by expert witness Luis Eduardo Thayer, is that both the labor code and the CPC, even today, essentially regulate relations among subjects of private law, without considering the particular nature of relations with the State, specifically on the subject of enforcement of judicial rulings.383 This situation is even worse in the case of Chile, which has no jurisdiction for administrative disputes that could accommodate the particular nuances of relationships with the State. 154. According to Article 433 of the Labor Code and Article 233 of the CPC that were in force at the time of these events, labor judgments were enforced through an accessory procedure before the same trial court, for which purpose the party had to petition the court within sixty days of the date when the verdict became enforceable. Under the common principles of labor law, labor courts generally take the initiative to advance proceedings themselves.384 There is some dispute, however, as to whether this action on the court’s motion also applied to the execution phase of the judgment if the matter became subject to the provisions of the CPC, where the parties themselves need to take action. Expert witness Luis Eduardo Thayer held that the execution process continued to be subject to the court’s own motion. He said: Thus, the “State-Municipality”, which in all due respects is the “State-State”, as are the judiciary and the executive, have no excuse or exception whatsoever, not to have paid the social security allowances in the thirteen trials conducted in labor proceedings. The State’s obligation to take the initiative in pursuing such procedures should have led it to complete all payments of the special allowances it was ordered to pay in 382 Labor Code of Chile. Articles 433 and 434, supra, para. 48. 383 Cf. Expert statement delivered before a public attestor by Luis Eduardo Thayer, May 24, 2021 (evidence file, folio 18735). 384 Indeed, as expert witness Thayer explained, “The principle of ‘procedural action at the court’s initiative’ in labor proceedings is inherent to the protective nature of substantive labor law, which seeks to extend preferential coverage to workers. This quality, the ‘parental principle’, takes several different forms, including the ‘in dubio prooperario’ principle, the standard that holds, ‘of the rule, the most beneficial condition’, and the ‘inalienability’ principle, that is, that rights granted by labor laws cannot be waived voluntarily or in advance. / Also included are the principle of ‘reasonableness or rationality’ and the principle of ‘primacy of reality’ that, in this case, should have been and still should be translated into the State’s inescapable obligation to comply ‘on its own motion’ with final judicial rulings against it.” Expert witness statement delivered before a public attestor by Luis Eduardo Thayer, May 24, 2021 (evidence file, folio 18743 18744). 53