TO THE
FULL SUPREME COURT
Filed May 10, 2005
Guillermo Kegevic Ahumada, attorney, on his own behalf and in
representation of claimants Dragomir Kegevic Ahumada, Nina Reyes
Guzman, Edgardo Zarate Barrera, Francisco Fuentes Nunez, all
domiciled for these purposes at 1623 Blanco, Office 1404, in
the city of Valparaiso, respectively address the Full Supreme
Court:
That, in light of serious irregularities that have occurred
in the city of Valparaiso, regarding cases of human rights violations
that courts of this city are investigating, the lack of interest,
the arbitrary treatment of such cases by those officials who
have the obligation to administer justice, we are compelled
as citizens to inform entity that protects our Constitution,
the Honorable Supreme Court, and to request that it instruct
or order an end to the Denial of Justice that affects us at
this time.
.
THE FACTS
On July 9, 2003 Guillermo Kegevic Ahumada and Dragomir Kegevic
Ahumada files a criminal complaint for the abduction and torture
resulting in death of Guillermo Kegevic Julio, and filed a denunciation
for the strange death of former Valparaiso Investigations Chief
Luis Bustos Marchant, situations involved the current State
Defense Council Attorney General for Valparaiso Enrique Vicente
Molina who from 1973 to 1974 served as Naval War Attorney Captain
of Justice and his Secretary Patricio Squiavetti Rosas.
An Investigative Judge was requested at the time the Complaint
was filed due to the grave nature of the facts of the case and
in light of the fact that persons involved and who held direct
responsibility for the crimes, held and continue to hold public
office. However, the Honorable Court of Valparaiso deemed unnecessary
the appointment of a special investigative judge.
I must point out to this Honorable Supreme Court that practically
no progress has been made in the investigation of this case.
Subsequently an Interim Judge was appointed to the case, and
then a succession of judges and officials resulting in the practical
abandonment of the investigation by those ho are vested with
responsibility to bring to light the facts of the case and administer
justice.
Paradoxically, the case was assigned to the State Defense Council
Attorney General Enrique Vicente Molina and to criminal attorney
Juan Garcia Bilbao, of the same entity which he directs and
who is empowered not only to learn procedural details of the
case but also know the contents of the investigation along with
the State Defense Council attorneys. In other words, due to
his capacity as Attorney General, the Council defends him institutionally,
according him all the guarantees and privileges enjoyed by that
agency.
On February 20, 2004 a criminal complaint is filed against Enrique
Vicente Molina and against all who share responsibility for
the Abduction and Torture resulting in permanent disabling injuries
committed against Nina Reyes Guzman. The complaint was admitted
and joined to the case of Guillermo Kegevic Julio as well as
the denunciation for former Investigations chief of Valparaiso
Juan Bustos Marchant, followed, in March 2004, with another
request for the appointment of a special Investigative Judge,
which the Honorable Court of Valparaiso once again turned down.
The case was assigned to the Second Criminal Court of Valparaiso
from which at different times six judges had the court record
in their hands, yet nothing was accomplished. On April 28, 2004
we requested authorization to view the investigation records
but this petition was denied.
On January 11, 2005 criminal complaint was filed against Enrique
Vicente Molina and others for the crimes of Illicit Association,
Abduction and Torture resulting in permanent disabling injury
of teacher Edgardo Zarate Barrera.
On January 11, 2005 a criminal complaint was filed against Carabinero
police officers Marcelo Vargas Goas, Oscar Correa Correa and
Guillermo Pena Gonzalez as well as Enrique Vicente Molina and
against all who bear responsibility for the crimes of illicit
association, abduction and torture committed against Dragomir
Kegevic Ahumada.
On January 20, 2005 a criminal complaint is filed against Enrique
Vicente Molina and all who bear responsibility for the illicit
association, abduction and torture resulting in serious, permanent
injury of Francisco Fuentes Nunez.
These
last three cases were joined with the criminal complained
filed November 29, 2004 by attorney Hector Salazar Ardiles
on behalf of the family of former Valparaiso
Investigations Chief Juan Bustos Marchant for the crimes of
abduction, application of torments and homicide. An individual
who holds major responsibility for these crimes is Enrique
Vicente Molina.
On
January 6, 2005 attorneys Hector Salazar Ardiles and Guillermo
Kegevic Ahumada petitioned the Honorable Court of Appeals
of Valparaiso to appoint a special judge to the cases which
shall be enumerated below. The Court denied the petition on
February 21, 2005 but instructed the judge of the Court of
Valparaiso to give particular and personal attention to the
cases. This has not occurred,and is unlikely to occur due
to the lack of interest to reach a conclusion or sentence
that would clarify the facts of these cases.
If the spirit is to let time pass, evidently this will happen,
as all human rights cases may be compelled to close on July
26, 2005. In other words the authors, accomplices or accessories
to the crimes may benefit from the gift of impunity, whereas
the victims of these crimes deserve to know at the very least
who tortured them. As this Honorable Supreme Court will recall,
most political prisoners were maintained blindfolded, which
cowardly protected the criminals who tortured them.
CASES INCLUDED IN THIS CLAIM
All the cases noted below are in process in the Second Criminal
Court of Valparaiso.
1. Causa Rol 145.783J
Plaintiff: Guillermo Kegevic Ahumada and Dragomir Kegevic
Ahumada
Defendant: Enrique Vicente Molina and all agents of the state
who bear responsibility
Denunciation for death of Juan Bustos Marchant
2. Causa Ro134.159J
Plaintiff: Nina Reyes Guzman
Defendant: Enrique Vicente Molina
3. Causa Rol 143.578R
Plaintiff: Hector Salazar Ardiles on behalf of the family
of Juan Bustos Marchant
Defendant:
4. Causa Rol 143.613J
Plaintiff: Dragomir Kegevic Ahumada
Defendants: Carabinero police officers Marcelo Vargas Goas,
Oscar Correa Correa, Guillermo Pena Gonzalez, Enrique Vicente
Molina and others
5. Causa Rol 143.612J
Plaintiff: Edgardo Zarate Barrera
Defendant: Enrique Vicente Molina and any others who bear
responsibility
6. Causa Rol 143.618J
Plaintiff: Francisco Fuentes Nunez
Defendant: Enrique Vicente Molina
CASE OF PRIEST MIGUEL WOODWARD IRIBERRY
This case exemplifies how courts of Valparaiso are operating
and reflects the situation that affects our own cases.
The case involves the aggravated abduction, torture and disappearance
of British priest Michael Woodward Iriberry, in 1973 aboard
the Naval Cadet Schooner Esmeralda. Officers of the Navy,
civilians and naval attorneys, including the present State
Defense Council Attorney Enrique Vicente Molina, are implicated
in these crimes.
I must point out that the proceedings in this case have been
affected by actions of individuals who have attempted to end
the investigation without determining who is responsible for
the death and disappearance of the priest. These obstacles
became evident to the Higher Courts when the decision was
made to remove Judge Gabriela Corti from the case, particularly
after legal action against her for obstruction of justice.
Most serious is the manner in which Enrique Vicente Molina
has made use of his rank, office and authority to access the
court record to gather information for his own benefit in
an attempt to obtain the dismissal of the case. It is known
that he was allowed to photocopy the entire court record,
on the basis of alleged need for the State Defense Council
to have the information on hand if it becomes party to the
case. This is an absolute falsehood, as the Council has never
had the intention of becoming party in this case because its
Attorney had involvement in the crime. This justification
by Molina was nothing more than a maneuver to obtain access
to the investigation.
In all the cases listed above, for which we seek intervention
by the Honorable Supreme Court, the State Defense Council
Attorney Molina has had involvement. Therefore, we may conclude
that these cases cannot count on a minimum degree of procedural
guarantees nor can we expect a positive outcome.
CURRENT SITUATION OF THE SECOND CRIMINAL COURT OF VALPARAISO
It is necessary that the Honorable Supreme Court become informed
on what is happening in the only Criminal Court that continues
to function under the former procedural system, and how this
affects human rights cases.
1. All cases are practically paralyzed because the officials
assigned to the cases are constantly changed, impeding a clear
and rational procedural development.
2. There are two judges in this single court who distribute
motions and briefs for resolution.
3. The chaos that affects cases is terribe and the quality
of officials who remained in this system is extremely poor,
or simply lack legal knowledge.
4. Magistrate Maria Elena Gonzalez Barra should be recused,
as her son works for the State Defense Council, which means
that the personal attorney of Vicente Molina as well as the
Council Criminal attorney Juan Garcia Bilbao have access to
all information related to the investigation, which is normally
off limits to Defendants and to which we as Plaintiffs have
no access.
THEREFORE
And in accordance with our rights enshrined by the Constitution,
We PRAY that
the Honorable Supreme Court will accept our claim for Denial
of Justice and order procedures to return constitutional law,
equity and justice to Valparaiso.
|
