In unanimous decision, the Court of Appeals of Santiago ordered the Treasury to compensate three victims of illegal detention and torture. Illicit acts perpetrated by members of the Armada in precincts of said military branch in the Bio bio region, in 1974 and 1975. According to one of the plaintiffs, with this historic ruling, sexual violence is formally recognized as a form of torture during the dictatorship.
The Court of Appeals of Santiago sentenced the treasury to compensate three victims of illegal detention and torture during the dictatorship.
These were illicit acts perpetrated by members of the Armada in precincts of said military branch in the Bio bio region, in 1974 and 1975, as published by the Power of attorney.
Court formally recognizes sexual violence as a systematic form of torture
In this regard, one of the plaintiff attorneys, Karinna Fernandez, who together with Magdalena Garcés took the case, highlighted the ruling despite the fact that the State Defense Council (CDE) refused to compensate the victims.
“As representatives of the victims, I regret the role of the State Defense Council in opposing these comprehensive reparation processes for the victims of the worst crimes known to our history,” he told BioBioChile.
Likewise, Fernández stressed that with this ruling, the Court formally recognizes sexual violence as a systematic form of torture during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet.
“A ruling of these characteristics makes it possible to make visible what has been kept silent for years, such as the systematic use by the Chilean Navy of sexual torture against men and women as a weapon of war,” he said.
“The ruling also recognizes the damage that these crimes imply for the survivors and especially recognizes the importance of the international norms that regulate the matter so that we advance as a society in comprehensive reparation formulas,” added the jurist.
“Thus the failure itself becomes a repair tool,” he concluded.
A unanimous decision
In unanimous decision, the Third room of the higher court –composed of the ministers Verónica Sabaj, Natacha Ruz and the minister Matías de la Noi– confirmed the appealed sentence, dictated by the Sixteenth Civil Court of Santiago.
The ruling established compensation of fifty million pesos for each plaintiff.
“Following the line of international jurisprudence and taking into account the provisions of the Convention of Belém do Pará, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has considered that sexual violence is configured with actions of a sexual nature that are committed on a person without their consent. , which in addition to including the physical invasion of the human body, may include acts that do not involve penetration or even physical contact, “indicates the ruling.
“That, on the other hand, in order to analyze the severity of the suffering suffered, the specific circumstances of each case must be taken into account,” he adds.
“To do this, the characteristics of the treatment must be considered, such as the duration, the method used or the way in which the conditions were inflicted, the physical and mental effects that these can cause.”
“As well as the conditions of the people who suffered such suffering, including age, sex, health status, among other personal circumstances,” he adds.
Court establishes the responsibility of the State
For the higher court, “women who have been subjected to sexual violence by State agents clearly continue to suffer from said aggression.”
“When analyzing the facts and their consequences, this Court will take into account that, in this case, the plaintiff was affected by the acts of violence in a different way than men, who are qualified as especially serious and reprehensible, taking into account the vulnerability of the victims and the abuse of power displayed by the perpetrators; a circumstance that, in any case, does not preclude considering the magnitude and special gravity of the damage suffered, also, by these”.
Likewise, it is considered: “That the State is responsible for the violation of the right to personal integrity enshrined in Article 5.2 of the American Convention, as well as for the violation of Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the aforementioned Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the detriment of the plaintiffs in this case, according to the facts considered true by the sentencing party a quo.”
“That, as a consequence of the foregoing reasoning, this Court considers that the compensations that have been determined are adjusted – to the extent that it is possible to establish – to the pain and affliction suffered by the plaintiffs as a consequence of the proven facts,” it concludes.