Inter-American Court of Human Rights condemns Chile for freedom of expression

San José, Nov 6 (EFE) .- The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) condemned the State of Chile as responsible for restricting the freedom of thought and expression of Judge Daniel David Urrutia Laubreaux in 2004.
According to the ruling, notified to the parties this Friday, Chile violated the rights to freedom of thought and expression, judicial guarantees and the principle of legality, also breached the obligation to respect and guarantee said rights and the duty to adopt provisions of internal law of the judge.
The lawsuit indicates that in 2004, the Supreme Court of Justice of Chile authorized Urrutia Laubreaux, then Judge of Guarantee of Coquimbo, to attend the "Diploma in Human Rights and Democratization Processes."
On November 30 of that same year, the Chilean judge informed the Supreme Court that he had approved the diploma and forwarded the final work in which he proposed that the Judicial Power adopt certain measures of reparation for the responsibility that said institution had in the violations of human rights that occurred during the Chilean military regime (1973-1990).
The Supreme Court forwarded the work presented to the competent body to discipline Urrutia Laubreaux, and later returned the academic work to him, informing him that the Supreme Court had considered that it contained "inadequate and unacceptable assessments" for said court, explained the sentence of the Inter-American Court.
On March 31, 2005, the Court of Appeals of La Serena decided to sanction Judge Urrutia Laubreaux with a disciplinary measure of "written censorship." After an appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the contested resolution and reduced the sentence to a "private reprimand".
Subsequently, on May 29, 2018, the Supreme Court of Justice of Chile annulled the sanction imposed.
In the judgment, the Inter-American Court found that "it was not in accordance with the American Convention to sanction expressions made in an academic work on a general topic and not a specific case, such as that made by Judge Urrutia," the text cites.
Furthermore, the Inter-American Court considered that, although in 2018 the Supreme Court of Justice repealed the sanction imposed on the Judge, it remained on Mr. Urrutia Laubreaux's resume for more than 13 years, which "affected his judicial career." .
The Court found that "at no time prior to the imposition of the sanction, Urrutia Laubreaux was informed of the initiation of a disciplinary proceeding against him, of the presumably violated norms, nor was he given a clear and concrete analysis regarding the said norms, which constituted a violation of the guarantee of having information and details of the process initiated against him.
In addition, the Inter-American Court indicated that the Court of Appeals of La Serena did not provide the Chilean judge with an opportunity to exercise his right to defense in writing or orally, which constituted an additional violation of the right to defense.
The conviction indicates that the regulations used to punish Urrutia Laubreaux "allowed a discretion incompatible with the degree of predictability that the regulations must display, and with this the principle of legality was violated" as well as that of judicial independence.
The judges of the Inter-American Court ordered various measures of reparation, including paying $ 20.000 for non-pecuniary damage, as well as $ 7.000 for reimbursement of costs and expenses.
The Inter-American Court, based in Costa Rica, is part of the Organization of American States (OAS), and its resolutions are binding on the countries of the hemisphere that have recognized its jurisprudence.

Extracted from INFOBAE, see here.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *