19 their liberty or subjected to torture for political reasons as a result of acts of Government officials or other persons under their authority” and to “propose reparation measures.” As for the measures that have benefited Mr. Almonacid-Arellano’s next of kin, the witness pointed out that all the members of the nuclear family have been entitled to the abovementioned health reparation measures. “Mr. Almonacid’s wife has received the pension [...]. Their children received the bonus […]. Throughout the years these measures have been effective, the nuclear family have received money transfers […] for some US$ 98,000.00 (ninety-eight thousand United States Dollars) altogether. In addition, two of the children availed themselves of the right to receive higher education grants under Law No. 19.123. [...] The nuclear family has received student grants for a total sum of US$ 12,180.00 (twelve thousand one hundred and eighty United States Dollars).” Lastly, the witness stated that “all of these reparation measures reflect the State’s will to recognize the human rights violations committed, including an individual recognition of the victims and their significance, and to adopt all such financial, health, educational, housing, and other measures as are necessary to meet the victim’s needs.” b) Expert Opinion of Mr. Cristián Maturana-Miquel, expert witness proposed by the State According to the expert witness, “after the [American] Convention was ratified, it was necessary to constrain its initial scope by means of a Declaration made by the Chilean State, taking into account that democracy cannot be restored immediately but gradually.” “Said Declaration, which is not a reservation, bars the Commission and the Court from hearing cases that concern events arising from circumstances that took place before March 11, 1990.” “The first recommendation [of the Inter-American Commission], which is to establish responsibility for the extra-legal execution of Luis Alfredo Almonacid-Arellano through a fair trial and a thorough and unbiased investigation of the facts, [...] requires the State to go back to an event that took place before March 11, 1990 and thus, pursuant to the Declaration made by the Chilean State, neither the Commission nor the Inter-American Court have competent jurisdiction.” The same is true of the second recommendation made by the Commission consisting of “adjusting these legislative or other measures so as to set aside Decree Law No. 2.191, known as the ‘self-amnesty’ law” inasmuch as “such Decree Law dates back to 1978 and therefore falls under the scope of the Declaration.” As regards “the adjustment of domestic legislation to Human Rights laws,” the expert witness stated that Chile “has slowly yet steadily introduced significant changes in that direction.” As for military criminal courts, the expert witness stated that “the scope of their jurisdiction has been restricted through Law No. 19.047, published in the Official Gazette of February 14, 1991” and “several changes have been introduced and granted constitutional status.”