the American Convention, and the right to the presumption of innocence, established in Article 8(2) of the American Convention, all in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán and Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles. c) Pre-trial detention of Aniceto Norín Catrimán and Pascual Pichún Paillalao348 344. The pre-trial detention of Messrs. Norín Catrimán and Pichún Paillalao was also governed by the provisions of articles 139 to 154 of the Criminal Procedural Code of 2000 (supra para. 305). They were both investigated and tried in relation to two offenses of terrorist arson and for the offense of threats of terrorist arson. They were sentenced and convicted as perpetrators of the offense of threats and acquitted of the offenses of terrorist arson (supra paras. 106 to 119). c.i) Pertinent facts a) Pre-trial detention of Aniceto Norín Catrimán Pascual and Pascual Pichún Paillalao 345. On January 11, 2002, a hearing was held before the Traiguén Guarantees Court to monitor the detention and open the investigation with regard to Aniceto Norín Catrimán, during which the Public Prosecution Service requested that the court order his pre-trial detention. The defense pointed out, among other matters, that “the prosecutor ha[d] not justified this and c[ould] not base his request on the fact that the relevant information he possessed ha[d] been declared secret, because, it [was] precisely on this information that the court must base its decision.” The prosecutor asserted that “regarding the participation, there are a series of testimonies that, at this time, are confidential, but if [the judge] wishes to examine them [he could] make them available to her,” and the judge ordered a recess “in order to examine the information.” The same day, the court ordered the measure requested, on the basis that: The requirements established in article 140 have been met; the offense has been proved, there is well-founded information that allows it to be presumed that the accused participated as perpetrator. In addition, there is also information from the court that reviewed and examined the information contained in the file of the investigation proceedings which the prosecutor showed me that allows it to be considered that pre-trial detention is essential for the success of the investigation and also considering that the release of the accused at this time would constitute a grave danger for society, especially because of the number of offenses of which he has been indicted and the severity of the punishment assigned to at least one of them: the offense of arson that is penalized by medium-term rigorous imprisonment at any of its levels for more than five years and one day. 346. On January 14, 2002, Mr. Norín Catrimán’s defense appealed the ruling issued on January 11, 2002, alleging that “[i]t has been argued that some information has been declared confidential, but it has never been indicated whether this contains information against my client” and that “by not disclosing the information that justifies such a severe precautionary measure, the possibilities of contesting it are impaired.” On January 18, 2002, a hearing was held to decide the said appeal, following which the Temuco Court of Appeal decided to confirm the decision appealed, with the exception of the argument “that the pre-trial detention would be essential for the success of the investigation,” which it ordered should be “eliminated.” 347. On March 4, 2002, a hearing was held before the Traiguén Guarantees Court to monitor the arrest and indictment of Pascual Pichún Paillalao, during which the Public Prosecution Service requested pre-trial detention. The court granted this, on the basis that “there is information that justifies the existence of the offense; also, there are well-founded presumptions that the accused participated in it and also there is specific information that allows the court to consider that pre-trial detention is essential for the success of the 348 The evidence relating to the facts established in this chapter on the pre-trial detention of Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán and Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao are to be found in the file of the domestic criminal proceedings, a copy of which was provided during the processing of the case before the Commission (file of annexes to the Merits Report, appendix 1, folios 4319 to 5159). 119