17 Code. During these proceedings, he was imprisoned “for about […] five days.” His wife filed with the Court of Appeals a request for protective measures against the violation of his constitutional rights. The Naval Court informed the Court of Appeals that “no proceedings had been initiated [and…] that the prosecutor had acted on his own initiative based on a complaint filed.” Neither he nor his attorney could have access to the case file to prepare his defense during the investigation; they could only do so after the Navy Prosecutor issued his report. They could not be present when witness testimony was rendered and he rendered a statement “behind closed doors.” These proceedings had significant impact on his life and that of his family. He lost his job, the money he spent in printing the books, he was arrested for writing the book and had to move to Punta Arenas. Both proceedings reached the Supreme Court of Chile; despite “the high costs” resulting therefrom. Moreover, once he stopped serving at the Navy after he was sentenced within the naval jurisdiction for “constituting an attack on national security,” he found no chances of working as a naval mechanic engineer at any company. Furthermore, in Viña del Mar, most families have at least one member in the Navy; therefore, that community deems that posing a threat to national security is “bad in itself.” During the proceedings before the Commission, the State showed “some kind” of intention to reach an agreement, but never made “a final proposal.” EXPERT WITNESSES a) Proposed by the representatives of the alleged victim 1. Cristian Riego-Ramírez, lawyer In Chile, there exists a procedure “to implement a large criminal justice reform aimed […] at incorporating the due process of law guarantee in the criminal system.” Nevertheless, said reform excluded the military jurisdiction, where a “significantly orthodox inquisitive system” is in force, disregarding the due process guarantee and imposing certain aggravating circumstances. This written procedure “basically consists of a unilateral and secret investigation through which […] a military prosecutor […] carries out[…] a pretrial investigation procedure incorporating […] information to the written case file,” without requesting the involvement of defendant or the attorney for defendant, though in theory a request “for inspection of investigation records” can be filed, and can be appealed upon denial. In practice, investigation proceedings are secret and the defendant only intervenes to render a statement, without the presence of his/her attorney. “All the information incorporated to the case file throughout the written pre-trial investigation stage will have conclusive evidentiary value at the time of rendering judgment; therefore, it is considered investigation and evidence at the same time.” The defense counsel may only intervene once the investigation is closed, when the trial stage starts and evidence may be requested; however any evidence