218. Based on this information it is possible to note that, in most proceedings this law was used against members of the Mapuche indigenous people: of the 19 proceedings in which the criminal investigation was conducted under the Counter-terrorism Act, in 12 of them, the accused were of Mapuche origin or the proceedings were related to land claims by this people. In this regard, several of the reports of the United Nations Special Rapporteurs and Committees have expressed concern owing to the application of the Counter-terrorism Act to members of the Mapuche indigenous people in relation to offenses committed in the context of the social protest244 or have mentioned a “disproportionate” application of the said law to the Mapuche.245 with final arguments, CEJIL advised the Court that it had verified directly the files of these proceedings and found that in 11 of the 21 cases the accused were “members of the Mapuche people.” The State did not contest this evidence or this statement by CEJIL, but ratified the latter, indicating in its final arguments that “the cases instituted by the Public Prosecution Service for terrorist offenses that were related to the Mapuche conflict between 2000 and 2013 numbered 11 throughout Chile.” b) The document that the State provided to the Inter-American Court in response to the request for helpful evidence indicating that it was a “List with a historical record of cases filed under the Counter-terrorism Act between 2000 and 2013 throughout Chile,” consists of a table with information on 17 proceedings instituted by the Public Prosecution Service in which the Counter-terrorism Act was used between 2000 and July 2013 throughout Chile, but does not contain information on the defendants disaggregated by ethnic origin (file of helpful evidence presented by the State, folios 52 to 55). The Court asked Chile to supplement the information presented in this document indicating “in which cases the defendants or those convicted were of Mapuche origin.” However, the State responded that this information had not been disaggregated and it was not possible to do this within the time frame accorded by the Court. When presenting its observations on this evidence, the FIDH stated that 12 of the 17 cases “are related to the Mapuche protest.” Chile did not contest this. 244 The 2007 report of the Human Rights Committee (CCPR/C/CHL/CO/5) expressed its concern that “charges of terrorism had been brought against members of the Mapuche community in connection with social protests or demands for protection of their land rights,” but did not refer to the selective application of the Counter-terrorism Act, but rather to the concern owing to the excessively broad definition of terrorism in Law No. 18,314 and to the restriction of procedural guarantees under this law. The 2007 report of the Special Rapporteur for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Martin Scheinin – who also provided an expert opinion before the Court in this case – expressed concern about the sentencing and conviction of nine members of the Mapuche community between 2003 and 2005 for offenses related to acts of social protest associated with the claims for indigenous traditional lands, owing to the definition of terrorism found in Chilean legislation. In 2009, following his visit to Chile from April 5 to 9, 2009, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, James Anaya, considered “a matter of some concern” the “application, especially in recent years, of the Counter-terrorism Act (Law No. 18314) to prosecute and convict members of the Mapuche community for offenses committed in the context of the social protest”. In 2009, in its concluding observations on Chile, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination “note[d] with concern that the Counter-Terrorism Act (No. 18,314) ha[d] been mainly applied to members of the Mapuche people for acts that took place in the context of social demands relating to the defence of their rights to their ancestral lands.” In this respect, this Committee recommended, inter alia, that Chile: “ensure that the Counter-Terrorism Act is not applied to members of the Mapuche community for acts of protest or social demands,” and that it put into practice the recommendations made in this regard by the Human Rights Committee in 2007 and by the special rapporteurs on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, following their visits to Chile in 2003 and 2009.” The Committee also drew the State party’s “attention to its General recommendation No. XXXI (2005) on the prevention of racial discrimination in the administration and functioning of the criminal justice system (sect. B, para. 5 (e)).” In its observations with regard to Chile of September 2013, the same Committee stated that “it remains concerned by reports that this law [No. 18,314] continues to be applied to a disproportionate extent to members of the Mapuche people in respect of acts that have taken place in connection with their assertion of their rights, including their rights to their ancestral lands,” and again recommended to the State that it “[e]nsure that the Counter-Terrorism Act is not applied to members of the Mapuche community for acts that take place in connection with the expression of social demands,” and that it “[i]mplement the recommendations made in this respect by the Human Rights Committee (2007) and by the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples (2003 and 2007) and take into account the preliminary recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (2013), and also “[m]onitor the application of the Counter-Terrorism Act and related practices in order to identify any discriminatory effect on indigenous peoples.” Cf. UN Doc. CCPR/C/CHL/C0/5, 17 April 2007, Human Rights Committee, Consideration of reports presented by States Parties under Article 40 of the Covenant, Concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee, Chile, para. 7 (file of annexes to the Merits Report 176/10, annex 8, folio 312); UN Doc. A/HRC/6/17/Add.1, 28 November 2007, Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Martin Scheinin, Addendum, para. 9 (file of annexes to the Merits Report 176/10, annex 10, folio 370); UN Doc. 76