new criminal system, george town journal

8/3/2019 New Criminal System, George Town Journal

1/23

25

* TheauthorisagraduateofUniversidadPedrodeValdiviasSchoolofLawinSantiago,Chile.SheisalsoaFederallyCertiedCourtInterpreterwiththeAdministrativeOceofU.S.CourtsandamemberoftheInternationalAssociationofConferenceInterpreters(AIIC).

25

ChilesRevampedCriminalJustice

SystemKATHERINE KAUFFMAN*

AbsTRAcTWhile much has been written in Spanish, and to a certain extent in English, about the criminal

procedure reforms sweeping Latin America, scant information is available in English that describesthe novel process itself. This paper seeks to provide a general overview of one of the most successful suchreforms in the region, the revamped system of criminal justice in Chile.

bAcKgRoUNd INFoRMATIoN

InDecember2000,Chilesnewcodeofcriminalprocedurecameintoeect.Thenewcodereplacedtheformerwritten,secretandinquisitionalsysteminplacesince1907withanoral,publicandadversarialprocedure.Inadditiontomodifyingbodiesoflaw,thecomplexreformprocessincludedtheinstallationofaseriesofnewinstitutions,includingtheOceofthePublicProsecutor (Ministerio Pblico),theOceoftheCriminalPublicDefender(Defensora Penal Pblica),GuaranteeCourt(Juzgados de Garantaspecialcourtstosafeguardtherightsofthedefendantandthevictimduringtheinvestigationprocess)andOralCriminalTrialCourts(Tribunales Orales de Juicio Penal).Itisimportanttonotethatundertheoldsystem,thetasksofinvestigating,indictingandadjudicatingacriminalcasewereinthehandsofasingleinvestigatingjudgeknownasajuez de instruccin.

The reform was implemented gradually, with dierent geographic regionsphased-inoveraperiodofveyears(20002005).TheprocessconcludedonJune16,2005witharoll-outintheSantiagoMetropolitanRegion,bringingthenewcriminalprocedureintoforceacrosstheentirecountryforthosecrimescommitted

afterthestart-updateineachregion.Underthenewsystem,prosecutorsreplacejudgesastheleadinvestigatorsofcriminalactivity.Followingcaseinitiation,proceedingscommencewithapresent-menthearing,followedbyacomplainthearing,aformalinvestigation,thelingofanaccusation,preparationsfortrialandthetrialitself(inasingle-judgeGuaranteeCourtorbeforeathree-judgepanelinanOralTrialCriminalCourtdependingonthespeciccircumstancesofthecase),averdict,appealstotheAppellateandSupremeCourtsandsentenceimplementationoverseenbytheGuaranteeCourt.Eachofthesephaseswillbedescribedingreaterdetailbelow.


2/23

26 [Vol.40

Geo. J. Intl Law: The Summit

Thenewsystemseekstoprovidespeedy,ecient,transparentandimpartialac-cesstojusticewhilerespectingfundamentalhumanrightsandstrikingabalancebetweenthegovernmentscoercivepowerandindividualrightsandliberties.The

newsystemreplacesthenegativefeaturesoftheoldmodelincludingapartialjudgeandslow,inecientproceedingswithnewlegalconceptsdesignedtosafe-guardindividualrightsandlibertiesandsolvecriminalcasespromptly.Thereformisgroundedonaseriesofunderlyingprinciples,1including:

1. Dueprocess;2. Righttodefense;3. Equalitybeforethelaw;

4. Presumptionofinnocence;5. Impartiality;6. Publicaccessandoralproceedingsinallcasesandhearings;7. Eciency(reectedinalternativedisputeresolutionmechanisms);8. Concentration (hearings are conducted in a single session with a

verdictannouncedshortlyafterclosingarguments);9. Confrontation(especiallyofwitnessesviacross-examination);and10. Procedural immediacy(personalcontactbetweenthejudgeandthe

partiesasaprerequisiteforthevalidityofallhearings).

I. THE PARTIcIPANTs

AccordingtoTitleIVofthenewCriminalProceduresCode(CPP),2thepartici-pants(sujetos procesales)inthenewcriminalsystemaretheOceofthePublicPros-ecutor(OPP),OceoftheCriminalPublicDefender(OCPD),thedefendant,victims,criminalcomplainants,lawenforcementandthecourts.3

A. Office of the Public Prosecutor

TheOPPisthecornerstoneofcriminalprosecutioninthenewsystem.Thisautonomous,hierarchicalandconstitutionally-rankedbodyistaskedwith:inves-tigatingcriminalacts;determiningpunishableparticipationoraccreditingthein-

1. AdditionalprinciplesandactionableprovisionsoflawinChilecanbefoundintheU.N.In-ternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights,ratiedbyChilein1999,andtheAmericanConventiononHumanRights(PactofSanJose,CostaRica).

2. ThenewcodeistheCdigo Procesal Penal.Theoldcode,Cdigo de Procedimiento Penal,wasalsoab-breviatedCPP.

3. PursuanttoArticle12oftheCriminalProceduresCode(CPP),theinterveningparties(inter-vinientes)are:theprosecutor,thedefendant,thecriminaldefender,thevictim,andthecriminalcomplainant.Witnessesareconsideredtobethirdparties.Thedistinctionbetweenparticipantsandpartiesisgermanetotheexerciseofcertainrights.


3/23

2010] 27

nocenceoftheaccused;exercisingpubliccriminalactionasestablishedbylaw4andadoptingmeasurestoprotectvictimsandwitnesses.5

AlthoughtheOPPissuesdirectorderstolawenforcementduringacriminalinvestigation,undernocircumstancesmaytheOPPhearoradjudicatecases.Anyactionsthatdeprivethedefendantorthirdpartiesoftheexerciseofrightsguar-anteedbytheConstitutionorthatrestrictthoseguaranteesrequirepriorjudicialauthorization(thisincludeswire-taps,liftingofbanksecrecy,etc.).

TheOPPisledbyaNationalProsecutorwhoisresponsibleforoverallleader-shipoftheProsecutorsOceatthenationallevel.TheNationalProsecutorsetsobjectives,policiesandinstitutionalguidelinesandplansfortheOPPintermsofbothpublicprosecutionofcriminalcasesandinstitutionalmanagement.Ad-ministratively,theOPPisdividedintogeographicunitsattheregionalandlocallevels.RegionalProsecutors(Fiscales Regionales)areresponsibleforperformingthedutiesandexercisingthepowersoftheOceofthePublicProsecutorinaspecicregionorgeographicportionofthatregioneitherpersonallyorthroughdeputyprosecutors.DeputyProsecutorsare,inturn,taskedwithdirectingtheinvestiga-tionofthecasesandpressingchargesagainstsuspectsbasedontheinvestigation.Towardthisend,DeputyProsecutors(Fiscales Adjuntos)mayorderotheragencies,inlcudingLawEnforcementandtheMedicalExaminertoengageingivenactions.DeputyProsecutorsarealsoresponsibleforensuringtheprotectionofvictimsandwitnesses and are supported in legal, administrativeand operational aairs byProsecutorialAssistants(Asistentes del Fiscal).6

Inaddition,theOPPisempoweredtoapplyalternativesolutionsingrapplingwith its case load.The options include postponinginvestigationsuntil furtherinformationisavailable,desistingfromaninvestigationonceinitiated,temporarysuspension(deferredadjudication)7ofthechargesagainstadefendantandResti-tutionAgreements8reachedbetweentheperpetratorandthevictim.Mostofthesedecisions,however,requiretheapprovaloftheGuaranteeJudgeandmustmeetspecicapplicabilityprovisions(seebelow).

AnotherimportantfeatureofthenewsystemisthatvictimscanopposetheOPPsuseofitsdiscretionarypowerstodismissacaseduringtheinvestigativephasebylinganindependentcriminalcomplaint(querella),therebyforcingthe

OPPtomoveforwardwiththeinvestigation.Moreover,certainvictimswhohaveledsuchacomplaintcanleanaccusationandcontinueonwiththecasethroughtrialeveniftheOPPdecidesnottopursuethecaseincourt.9

4. AlthoughmostcrimesarepursuablebyOPPprosecutorsattheirowninitiative,somerequirethatacrimereportbeledrst(accin pblica previa instancia particular)whileothers,suchaswritingbadchecks,canonlybeprosecutedviaprivatecriminalcomplaint( accin privada).CPP,arts.54-55.

5. Law19640[OceofthePublicProsecutor],art.1,DiarioOcial,Oct.15,1999(Chile).

6. Id. tit.II.

7. CPP,art.237.

8. Id.art.241.

9. Id.arts.109,111,258.

CHILES JUSTICE SYSTEM


4/23

28 [Vol.40


Onceincourt,theOPPmayalsorequesttheuseofoneofthreetime-savingalternativetrialprocedures(seeCourtsbelow)toexpeditecaseresolution.

b. Office of the Criminal Public Defender

TheOceoftheCriminalPublicDefender(OCPD)wascreatedbylaw 10in2001andfallsunderthedirectsupervisionofthePresidentthroughtheMinistryofJustice.TheOCPDisledbyaNationalPublicDefenderandcomposedofre-gionalandlocalpublicdefenders,followingastructurequitesimilartothatoftheOPP.11Thedistinguishingfeatureis,however,thatnotallpublicdefendersareem-ployeddirectlybythisoce:someareinfactprivateattorneyswhoseoceshave

participatedinastrictlyregulatedpublictenderprocesstoserveinthiscapacity.12

Thus,bothsetsofdefenders,bothpublic-publicandprivate-publicaretaskedwithprovidingprofessionaldefensetothoseindividualsunderformalinvestiga-tionoraccusedofacriminaloensethatcomesunderthejurisdictionofthenewcriminalprocedure.Specically,publiccriminaldefendersareresponsiblefor:

a) Defending theprocedural rights and liberties of thedefendantand ensuring his/her actual and equitable participation in theproceedings.13b) Representingthedefendantincourt;takingpartineveryjudicial

proceedingandhearingcommencingwiththeinitialactionagainstthedefendantthroughnaljudgment.c) Assisting defendants and informing them of procedures andoptions.

Public defenders areprovided freeofchargefor thosedefendantsunable toaordanattorney(incomeunderUS$200amonth,approximately).Thoseabletopayarechargedonaslidingscale(inpractice,only3%ofalldefendantsrepre-sentedbytheOCPDmakesuchco-payments).

Defendantswhowishtohiretheirownprivateattorneyattheirownexpense

maydoso.

c. Victims

PursuanttoArticle83oftheConstitutionofChile,oneofthethreekeyfunc-tionsoftheOPPistoadoptprotectivemeasuresforvictimsandwitnesses.Thisconstitutionalmandateisnewunderthereformandrepresentsasubstantivede-

10. Law19718[OceofthePublicDefender],DiarioOcial,Mar.10,2001(Chile).

11. Id.tit.II.

12. Id.tits.33,53.

13. Id.art.2.


5/23

2010] 29

parturefromtheprevioussysteminwhichsuchindividualswereaordednospe-cialprotectionortreatment.

TheCriminalProceduresCode(CPP)furtherspeciestheprotectivedutiesoftheOPPregardingvictims,statingthatitshallbethedutyofprosecutorsduringtheentireproceduretotakemeasuresorrequestthem,ifapplicable,toprotectvic-timsofcrime;tofacilitatetheirinvolvementintheproceeding,andtoavertorlimittoaminimumanyinconveniencetheymayhavetobearasoftheresultoftheirparticipationinsaidproceedings.14Thesamesectionestablishesthatprosecutorsareboundto:Orderontheirowninitiativeorrequestofthecourt,ifapplicable,measuresaimedattheprotectionofthevictimandhis/herfamilyinthefaceofprobableharassment, threatsor attacks.15ThisprovisionextendstheprotectivedutyoftheOPPtothevictimsfamily.ThelawalsorequirestheOPPtoprovidesimilarprotectionforwitnesses.16

Inbroadterms,suchprotectionisprovidedviatwomechanisms:

1.Prosecutor-orderedprotection

Prosecutorsmayadoptthefollowingmeasuresonbehalfofvictimsorwitnessesontheirowninitiative.Nocourtorderisrequiredasthissetofmeasuresdoesnotimpingeontherightsofthedefendant.Theyinclude:17

a) Periodicroundsbylawenforcement(Carabineros de Chile(uniformed)andPolica de Investigaciones(plainclothesdetectives))atthewitnesshomeorworkplace;b) Prioritytelephonecontactforawitnesswiththepolice;c) Condentialityofdomicileduringtheinvestigationandattrial;d) WitnesssubpoenaandstatementatalocationotherthanthelocalProecutorsOce,whenacceptedbythewitness;e) Arrangingforchangestotelephonenumbersorrequestingaprivatenumberforthewitness;f) Provisionofcellulartelephoneswithemergencynumbers;andg) Provisionofpersonalalarms.

14. CPP,art.78.

15. Id.art.78(b).16. Id.art.308.

17. Id.art.109;see also Gua para la Proteccin de Vctimas de Delitos ,VictmandWitnessProtectionDivision,OceofthePublicProsecutor,Chile.2002.



6/23

30 [Vol.40


2.Court-orderedprotectivemeasures18

Toimplementthesemeasures,prosecutorsmustobtaincourtauthorizationbe-causetheyaecttherightsofparticipantsorthirdpartiesorbecauseitisrequiredbylaw.Keymeasuresinthiscategoryinclude:

d) Interimmeasures,suchas:pretrialcustodyofthedefendantandother restrictive measures of his/her freedom, includingrestrainingorders;19

e) Changeofidentityand/orrelocation,asprovidedforinspecicstatutes;20andf) Condentialityofwitnessidentityduringtrial;

In addition, if petitioned, the court may adopt several protective measureswherethereisreasonablecause.Thesemeasuresinclude:21barringaccessororder-ingtheremovalofspecicindividualsfromthecourtroom;barringaccessbythepublicingeneralororderingtheroomclearedinordertohearspecictestimony;prohibitingtheprosecutor,otherparticipantsandtheirlawyersfromdeliveringin-formationormakingstatementstothemediaduringthecourseofthetrialandtheuseofidentitydistortingmeasures,includingfoldingscreenstoseparatewitnessesfromtherestofthecourtroom,statementsbyclosedcircuittelevision,disguisesandvoicedistortiontechniques.

Specialprovisionsalsopermitchildrentotestifyfromaseparateroomviaclosedcircuittelevision.Inaneorttoreducesecondaryvictimizationandmakechildrenmorecomfortable,theattorneysforthedefenseandtheprosecutionpreparealistofquestionsthatarethenreadtotheminorbythePresidingJudgewhositsintheseparateroomwiththechild.22

WhileU.S.-styledepositionsarenotanoptionintheChileansystem,thenewproceduresdoallowevidencetobeproducedduringpreliminaryhearingstotrialtoensuretheavailabilityofavictimorwitnessstatementattrial,whenthereisafearofthedeathorphysicalormentaldisabilityofthewitnessthatwouldpre-venthimfromappearingattrial.23Procedurally,aspecialhearingisheldpriorto

thetrialinthepresenceofallparticipantsentitledtoattendthetrialtoheartheevidencecontributedbytheprotectedindividual.24Thisevidenceissubsequentlyincludedintheoraltrialbyreadingthestatementfromtherecordofthathearing.25

18. CPPart.308.

19. Id.tit.V4.

20. See, e.g., Law20000[IllegalTrackingofNarcoticandPsychotropicSubstances],art.35,DiarioOcial,Feb.16,2005(Chile).

21. CPPart.292.

22. Id.art.310.

23. Id.art.191.

24. Id.

25. Id.art.331.


7/23

2010] 31

Nonetheless,thistechniquehasrunintopracticalsnagsthatmakeitsapplicationratherlessthanwidespread.

d. Criminal Complainant (querellante)26

Asnotedabove,thenewcodeallowsvictimsand,inverylimitedcases,otherinterestedpartiestoleacriminalcomplaintandcarryforwardaprosecutionevenintheabsenceoftheOPP.27ThisfeatureiscarefullyregulatedintheCPP,whichrequiresthatpartieswhotakeadvantageofthisoptionbediligentintheirproceed-ings,complywithalllegaltimelimitsandparticipateincertainhearings,underpenaltyofhavingthecasedismissed.Defendantssoprosecutedmayalsopetitionfordamagesifthecomplainantprovesirresponsibleornegligentinprocessing

theircase.28

E.Law Enforcement

Chilehastwonation-widepoliceforces,theuniformedCarabineros de ChileandtheplainclothesPolicia de Investigaciones de Chile.Bothforcesareconsideredtobeaux-iliaryinstitutionstotheOPPintheinvestigationofcriminalevents.29Bothforcesinvestigatecrimesatthebehestoftheprosecutorsoce,implementcoercivemea-suresasordered,andarerequiredtofollowordersandreporttoprosecutorsontheresultsoftheirinvestigations.30Althoughasageneralrulelawenforcementneedsanorderfromtheprosecutor(orthecourt,asthecasemaybe)totakeaction,of-cerscanperformcertaindutiesattheirowninitiative,31suchas:

1. Aidingvictimsofcrime;2. Arresting perpetrators of in fragranti crimes or individuals with

outstandingarrestwarrantsagainstthem;3. Safeguardingcrimescenes;4. Collectingcrimesceneevidence;5. Identifyingwitnessesandtakinginitialstatements;6. Receivingcrimereportsfromthepublic;and

26. Id.tit.IV7.

27. Id.

28. Id.art.119.

29. Id. tit.IV3.

30. Id. art.80.

31. Id. art.83.



8/23

32 [Vol.40


7. Performingidentitychecks.32

F.

Courts33

Thecourtsoftherstinstancearedividedintotwolevels:

1.GuaranteeCourts

Asageneralrule,GuaranteeCourtjudgesplayaroleakintothatofamagis-tratejudgeintheU.S.federalsystem(seespecicfunctionsbelow).Thesejudgesmayalsohearandadjudicatecasesinvolvinglessercrimes(insimplied,abbrevi-

atedormonitoringproceedings)andapproveorrejectRestitutionAgreements(seebelow).

GuaranteeCourtsarecomposedofoneormorejudgeswhositonsingle-judgebenches,whosemainfunctionsareto:a)grantauthorizationforinvestigativepro-ceduresthatcurtailorotherwiseimpedetheexerciseofconstitutionalrights; 34b)tryandadjudicatecasesundersimplied,abbreviated,ormonitoringprocedures;c) oversee implementation of sentences stemming from guilty verdicts handeddownagainstindividualsdeemedcriminallyliable35andsupervisesecuritymea-suresforthoseinvolvedincriminalactswhoarenotfoundcriminallyliable(i.e.thementallydisturbed)36andd)conducthearingsduringtheinvestigativephaseandresolveancillaryproceedingsthatariseduringthatstage.37

CommonhearingsbeforetheGuaranteeCourtsinclude:

a. Initialappearanceandcomplainthearings.38b. Interimmeasure(medidas cautelares)hearingsduringtheinvestigation,

including pretrial detention39 (and setting time limits for such

32. PursuanttoArticle85,CPPwhentherearesucientgroundstosuggestthatacrimehasjust

beencommitted,isabouttobecommittedorhasjustbeenattempted,amongothercases,lawenforcementmayrequireapersontoproduceavalidformofidentication.PersonswhofailtoproducesuchI.D.canberetainedatapolicestationorotherpublicfacilityforuptoeighthourswhiletheiridentityisveried.Moreover,policecansearchtheperson,theirpersonalpossessionsandvehicleduringthecourseofthespotcheck(evenwhenthepersonproducesvalididentica-tion).Thisformofinvestigativedetentioniscalledacontrol de identidadandthepersonsoretainedisconsideredcontrolada(controlled)ratherthandetenida(arrested).

33. Id. tit.IV1.

34. Id. art.70.

35. Id.art.468.

36. Id. art.458.

37. See e.g., id. arts.71,169.

38. Id. art.95.

39. Id.art.139.


9/23

2010] 33

detentionifgranted).40

c. Simplied Procedure:41 Used when the oense involved is amisdemeanor ( falta penal)orlessercrime(delito simple)forwhichthe

OPPhasrequestedaneectivesentenceofnomorethan540daysofprisontime.

d. AbbreviatedProcedure:42MayberequestedbytheProsecutorwhentheperiodofincarcerationhe/shehasproposedisunder5years.ThedefendantmustagreetothisprocedureandacknowledgethefactsasstatedintheaccusationledbytheProsecutor.

e. MonitoringProcedure:43Usedsolelywhentheoensecommittedisamisdemeanorpunishablesolelybyne.

f. RestitutionAgreements:44Thisnowwidely-usedalternativesystemofrestorativejusticeisafurtherinnovationunderthereformandconsists

ofanagreementbetweenthevictimandthedefendantthatbringsthecasetoaclose.TheagreementmustbeapprovedbytheGuaranteeJudgeinapublichearing,withallpartiespresent.Whiletheprosecutorcanvoiceoppositiontotheagreement,theOPPcannotimpedesuchanaccordfrommovingforwardsolongastheGuaranteeJudgendsthatitcomplieswiththelaw.Thisoptionisavailableonlywhenthecaseunderinvestigationinvolvesalegally-availableprotectedinterestofaneconomicnature,lesserinjuryorcrimesofnegligence.Shouldthe perpetrator fail tocomply withthe termsof the agreement,thecasereturnstocourt.

g. Pretrialconferenceondiscoveryandmotions45

.

2.OralCriminalTrialCourts

These courtrooms, known by their Spanish acronym TJOP (Tribu-nal de Juicio Oral en lo Penal), are composed of three professional judges whosit in a collegiate tribunal that hears and conducts the oral trial and ac-quits or convicts the defendant. These courts are primarily responsible for:

a.Hearingandadjudicatingcaseswhereanoensehasbeencommitted,pursuanttotheCriminalProceduresCode.

b.Rulingonanyancillaryproceedingsinitiatedduringtheoraltrial. c. Acquitting or convicting defendants and rendering nal judgment

basedontheevidencepresentedatthetrial.

40. Id. art.157.

41. Id. art.308.

42. Id. art.406.

43. Id.art.392.

44. Id.art.241.

45. Id. art.277.



10/23

34 [Vol.40


Judgeshaveaccesstoasummaryofthecaseandadmissibleevidencepriortotrial(auto de apertura de juicio oral)46butarenotprivytotheparticularsoftheproceed-ingsthattookplacebeforetheGuaranteeCourt.

3.AppellateCourts

ChiledidnotintroducesubstantivechangestoitsappellatecourtstructureortheSupremeCourttoaccommodatethenewcriminalsystem.Newregulationswereintroduced,however,tograpplewiththeneedforadditionalprocedures.Forexample,adjudicationhandeddownbybothGuaranteeCourtsandOralCrimi-nalTrialCourtsisgenerallysubjecttoreviewbyasuperiorcourtviaamotionforrevieworannulment,accordingtospecicprovisionsoflaw.47

Asageneralrule,thedecisionsofGuaranteeCourtsmadeduringoralproceed-ingscannotbeappealed.48However,whentherulingisissuedinwriting,theissuewasnotdebatedinopencourtorwherethedecisionbringstheproceedingtoaclose,makesitimpossibletocontinueorsuspendsitforover30daystherulingcanbechallengedattheAppellateCourt.49AsaresultofaMarch2008modica-tiontothelaw,whentheGuaranteeJudgedeniesaprosecutorsrequestforthedefendanttoberemandedsheremainsincustodyuntiltheAppellateCourtissuesitsruling.Previously,defendantswerereleasedontheirownrecognizancewhilependingappeal.

RulingshandeddownbytheOralTrialCourtsarenotsubjecttoappealbutcanbechallengedthroughamotiontorevieworannul.50PursuanttoArticle373oftheCPP,thetrialand/orthejudgmentcanbedeclarednullandvoid:

a. When rights enshrined inthe Constitution or international treatiesinforceinChilehavebeensubstantivelyviolatedatanystageoftheproceedingsorinthejudgment;or

b. Whenanerroneousapplicationoflawhassubstantivelyaectedtheoutcome.

Inaddition,inkeepingwithArticle374,trialsandjudgmentswillbedeclarednullandvoidincasesofseriousproceduralbreaches(includingrulingshandeddownbycourtslackingjurisdiction,whenthemandatoryminimumnumberof

judgesisnotmet,whereparticipantsrequiredtobepresentwereabsent,whereeectivedefensehasbeenhampered,etc.)ViolationsofArticle373(a)areheardbytheAppellateCourt.ViolationsofArticle373(b)andArticle374areheardbytheSupremeCourt.

46. Id.art.281.

47. Id. arts.352,364.

48. Id. art.370.

49. Id.

50. Id.arts.364,372.


11/23

2010] 35

II. THE PRocEss

Theprocedureinvolvesthreestages:aninvestigativephase,anintermediatephaseandatrialphase.

A.Investigative Phase51

Thisstepisadministrativeinnatureandledbytheprosecutorratherthanthecourts.Whileeachinstitutionhasitsownin-houseproceduresandcourtappear-ancesarecarefullyregulated,theocialinvestigativephaseischaracterizedbya

lackofbureaucraticformalityandanabsenceoftherigidstructuresinherenttotheprevioussystemofcriminalprosecution.Forexample,inthepast,allcourtordershadtobeprocessedinwriting,viaocialproceduresandchannels.Today,instructionscanbegivenoverthephone(withanotationmadeinthecaseleorothersubsequentwrittenconrmation),byfax,emailoranyotherchanneltheprosecutordeemsreliable.

1.CaseInitiation:criminalcasescancommenceviathreemechanisms52

1. Crime report:victimsorwitnessesofcrimecanleareportwitheitherofChilestwolawenforcementagencies,53CarabinerosdeChile(uni-formed),PolicadeInvestigacionesdeChile(plainclothesdetectiveforce).

2. Criminal complaint: victims, certain public institutions and, in speciccases,anyresident,canlean independentcriminalcomplaint.Thecomplaintisledandloggedatthecourthouseandthenforwardedbythecourttothelocalprosecutorsoce.Thecriminalcomplaintis

broadlyusedbyvictimsofcrimewhoopposetheprosecutorsdecisionnottopursueaninvestigationintheircase.

3.Attheprosecutorsinitiative(sua sponte):prosecutorscanorderlawen-forcementtocommenceaninvestigationwheninformationcomestotheirattentionthatacrimehasbeencommitted.Thisincludescasesofin fragranticrimesinwhichanarresthasbeenmade.

51. Id. book2,tit.I.

52. Id.art.172.

53. Id.art.173.



12/23

36 [Vol.40


OnceacrimehasbeenreportedtotheOPP,theprosecutorisgenerallyobli-gatedtotakemeasurestodeterminetheevents,theidentityofparticipantsandsoforthwithinareasonabletimeframe.54However,thelawprovidesforthreediscre-

tionarycasemanagementpowers(alternativas a la investigacion)thattheprosecutorcanusetocloseacaseorpostponeinvestigation.Thisprosecutorialdiscretionisdesignedtosaveresources,reducecongestioninthecriminalprosecutionsystemandrespondtotheprinciplesoflegalityandobjectivitycontainedinChilespri-marybodiesoflaw.

Thediscretionarycasemanagementpowersare:

a)Optout(no iniciar la investigacion):55theprosecutormaydecidenottoinitiate an investigation when no investigative actions have beenundertakenand:

i)Thefactsofthecasearenotcriminalinnature,orii)Thestatueoflimitationsontheactshasrunitscourse.

Insuchcases,theprosecutormustjustifytheirdecisionandseekapprovalfromaGuaranteeJudge.

b)Temporaryarchive(archivo provisional):56Theprosecutormaydecidetoarchivethecaseandpostponeinvestigationuntilfurtherinformation

isavailable.Thisoptionisavailabletotheprosecutoriftheinitialin-formationprovidedisinsucienttoallowforinvestigativeactionstobeconductedanduntilsuchatimeastheGuaranteeJudgebecomesinvolvedinacase(forexample,ifawiretaporderisneeded).Atthatpoint,theprosecutorsoptionprecludes.Ifthecrimeinvolvedwouldcarryasentenceofover5yearsand1day,thedecisiontoarchivemustbe approved by the Regional Prosecutor. Victims can oppose thetemporaryarchivebypetitioningforthecasetobereopened,lingacomplaintwiththeOPPorlingacriminalcomplaint.InthelattercasetheOPPisobligatedtomoveforwardwiththeinvestigation.

c) Streamlined procedures ( principio de oportunidad):57 A prosecutor maychoosenot to initiatean investigation orabandon an investigationunderwaywhen:

i) The events involved do not gravely compromise the publicinterest;andii)Thepotentialsentenceisbelow541daysofprison;and

54. See id. art.77.

55. Id.art.168.

56. Id.art.167.

57. Id.art.170.


13/23

2010] 37

iii) The crime was not committed by a civil servant in theperformanceofhis/herduties.

Inapplicablesituations,theprosecutornotiestheGuaranteeJudgeofhis/herdecisiontoapplystreamlinedcasemanagementandprovidesthegroundsforsuchachoice.TheJudgethennotiesthepartieswhohave10daystoopposethedeci-sion.Shouldthejudgendthatthecasetheprosecutorisseekingtostreamlinecarriesasentenceofover541daysorinvolvesacivilservantintheperformanceofhis/herduties,thejudgecanreversetheprosecutorsdecisionathisowninitia-tive.58

Afterasecond10-daywindowforcomplaint,criminalactionexpires.Thus,theprosecutormayNOTreopensuchacaseifadditionalinformationsurfacessub-sequently.Thisistheprimarydistinctionbetweentheoptoutandtemporary

archivediscretionarypowers,asthelattertwotechniquesdoallowaprosecutortoreopenacaseatalaterdate.

Lastly,iftheprosecutoropensaninvestigativecasele( una carpeta)andlaterde-cidesthatacaseissimplynotworthpursuing,he/shemustclosethecasepursuanttotheregulationsoncaseclosure.59He/sheisprecludedfromapplyingprosecuto-rialdiscretionforthatpurpose.

2.Initialappearanceorpresentmenthearing(audiencia de control de detencin)60

Incasesofin fragranticrimes,lawenforcementandprosecutorsmustpresentthedetaineebeforeaGuaranteeJudgewithin24hoursofthearrest.Failuretodosowillleadtotheimmediatereleaseofthedefendant,aswillfailuretoappearbyanappropriaterepresentativeoftheProsecutorsOce(DeputyProsecutororPros-ecutorialAssistant).

3.Complainthearing(audiencia de formalizacin de la investigacin)

AccordingtoArticle229oftheCriminalProceduresCode,atthecomplainthearingtheprosecutorcommunicatestothedefendant,inthepresenceoftheGuaranteeJudge,thattheOPPiscurrentlyinvestigatinghim/herwithregardtooneormorespecic crimes.Thedefendantmustbe presentat thishearing.InSpanish,thisphaseiscalledformalizacin de la investigacin orformalizationofthein-vestigation.ThisstagediersfromanarraignmentinthetypicalU.S.procedureinthatthedefendantdoesnotenterapleainChile.Moreover,anadmissionofguiltbyadefendantinChile(reconocimiento de responsabilidad)atanystageinthepro-

58. Id.Thisisoneoftheverylimitedcasesinthenewsysteminwhichthejudgeisempoweredtotaketheinitiativeorordertheprosecutortoproceedinagivenfashion.

59. Id. art.248.

60. Id. art.94.



14/23

38 [Vol.40


ceedingsdoesnotprecludeatrial.Itmay,however,leadtotheuseofanalternativeprocedure(seebelow).

Theformalizationofthecaseatthecomplainthearinghasthreemajoreects:61

1. Thestatuteoflimitationsonthecriminalactionissuspended;62

2. Thestatutorytimeframefortheinvestigationcommences(amaximumoftwoyears);and

3. The prosecutor is barred from using the temporary archivediscretionarycasemanagementtool.

Moreover,atthecomplainthearing(orthereafter),thepartiescanrequestaseriesofadditionalproceduralactions,including:

1. Interimmeasures(reliefofassets,pretrialdetention,etc.)63

2. Alternativedisputeresolutionmeasures64

3. JudgesapprovalofRestitutionAgreements65

4. Reductioninthetimeallottedfortheinvestigation5. Immediatetrial66

6. Simpliedproceeding.67

4.Alternativedisputeresolutionmechanisms68

Duringtheinvestigativephaseandafterthecomplainthearing,theprosecutor,publicdefender,victimand/orcriminalcomplainantcanproposetheuseofnon-traditionaldisputeresolutionmechanisms.ThenewCPPprovidesfortwosuchmechanisms:

1. RestitutionAgreements(acuerdos reparatorios).69Thisoptionisavailableonlywhenthecaseinvolvesalegally-availableprotectedinterestofaneconomicnature(forexample,propertyorassets),minorinjuryor

crimesofnegligence(includingnegligenthomicide).2. Deferredadjudicationortemporarysuspensionoftheproceeding

61. Id.art.233.

62. Thestatuteissuspended,butnotinterrupted.Inotherwords,thetimeremaininginthestatuteoflimitationsresumesiftheprosecutionsubsequentlydecidesnottoproceedwiththecase.

63. Id.art.232.

64. Id.art.245.

65. Id.art.241.

66. Id.art.235.

67. Id.art.390.

68. Id.book2,tit.I6.

69. Id.art.241.


15/23

2010] 39

( suspension condicional del procedimiento).70 Adjudication can be deferredforrst-timeoendersforaperiodofbetweenoneandthreeyearsaslongasthetimetobeserved,werethedefendanttobeconvicted,

isunderthreeyears.Thecasewillreturntocourtforprosecutionifthedefendantischargedwithanewcrimeduringtheperiodofthesuspensionorotherwiseviolatestheconditionsofthedeferral.71

5.Closeoftheinvestigation72

TheOPPcancloseacaseatanytimeduringtheinvestigativephase(cappedbylawattwoyears)bycommunicatingthisintenttotheGuaranteeJudge.Within

10days 73 ofthatcommunication, the prosecutormaytakeone ofthreeactions(Article248):

1. Desist (decisin de no perseverar en el procedmiento)74becauseofalackofevidenceonwhichtobaseanaccusation.Inthiscase,theGuarantee

Judgeordersanyexistinginterimmeasuresliftedandthestatuteoflimitationscontinuesitscoursenormally.

2. Request that the case be dismissed with ( sobreseimiento temporal) orwithoutprejudice(sobreseimiento denitivo).75Inthelattercase,thedefensecanopposetheprosecutorsrequestandaskthejudgetoorderthe

casedismissedwithprejudice.

70. Id. art.238.

71. Id. art.239.

72. Id. art.247.

73. Shouldtheprosecutorfailtoclosethecaseasrequiredbylaw,thedefensecanforcethecaseclosedadministratively.Inextremecases,thiscanleadtothedismissalofchargesforthedefen-dantand/ortochargesbroughtagainsttheprosecutorforderelictionofduty.

74. Id.art.248(c).

75. Id. art.248(b).Petitionfordismissalwithprejudice:PursuanttoArticle250oftheCPP,theGuaranteeJudge

grantssuchdismissalwhenclearly:a)nocrimewascommitted;b)thedefendantdidnotcommit the crime; c) there are extenuating circumstances (mental illness, for example);d)criminalliabilityhasbeenexhausted(time-barred);e)whenaneventhassubsequentlytranspiredthatprecludedcriminalresponsibility;f)thematterhasalreadybeentried( res

judicata).TheGuaranteeJudgemaynot,however,orderdismissalwithprejudicewheninter-nationaltreatiesprohibitacrimefrombeingsubjecttoastatuteoflimitationsoramnesty.

Petitionfordismissalwithoutprejudice:PursuanttoArticle252oftheCPP,theGuaranteeJudgeordersdismissalwithoutprejudicewhen:a)aftercommittingthecrime,thedefendantbe-camementallyderanged;b)whenthedefendantfailstoappearandisdeclaredincontempt;

c)whenacivilmatterneedstobedecidedbeforethecriminalcasecanbeheard(forexample,determiningfamilytiestodecidewhetherahomicideisaggravatedonthegroundsofthoseties).Dismissalwithoutprejudiceputsastayontheproceeding.TheGuaranteeJudgecanreopenthecaseattherequestofanyofthepartieswhentheobstacletoproceedinghasbeenremoved.



16/23

40 [Vol.40


3. File a formal accusation:76 should the prosecutor decide to presscharges,heorshemaydosoinwritingororallyinaspecialhearingbeforetheGuaranteeJudge.Criminalcomplainantsmayadhereto

thecharginginstrument.Atthispoint,theJudgewillsetadateforapretrialconference.

6.Theaccusation

Thecharginginstrumentorstatementmustcontain:77

1. Theidentityofthedefendant(s)anddefensecounsel;2. Adescriptionofthefactsofthecaseandtheirlegalattributes;

3. Adescriptionofanymitigatingfactorsinvolvedinthecase;4. Theformofparticipationintheeventsthedefendantischargedwith;5. Adescriptionofapplicablelegalprinciples;6. AnoutlineoftheevidencetheOPPintendstopresentattrialincluding,

asageneralrule,alistofwitnesses(ifapplicable);7. Thesentencerequested;and8. When applicable, a petition to proceed using the Abbreviated

Procedure(thisisthelastchanceforsucharequest).

Theaccusationmayonlyrefertothoseeventsandindividualsincludedinthe

originalcomplaint,althoughthelegalattributesmaybedierent(forexample,thecomplaintdescribedtheeventsasahomicideandtheaccusationdescribesthesameeventsasnegligenthomicide).78

Itisimportanttonote,however,thatshouldtheprosecutoroptnottopresschargesatthisstage(no perseverar),theattorneysforacriminalcomplainantmayleaprivateaccusation(assumingtheyhavebeenpresentthroughoutthepro-cesspursuanttothecorrespondingprovisionsoflaw).Inthiscase,asmentionedabove,preparationsfortrialwouldmoveforwardwithoutthepresenceofthepub-licprosecutor.79

b.Intermediate Phase

Thefundamentalcomponentoftheintermediatephaseisthepretrialconfer-enceondiscoveryandmotionsbeforetheGuaranteeJudge.Within24hoursofthepresentationofthecharginginstrumentbytheprosecutor,theGuaranteeJudgeissuesanorderforapretrialconferencetobeheldinthesubsequent25to35days.80

76. Id.art.93(f).

77. Id. art.259.

78. Id.art.259.

79. Id.art.258.

80. Id.art.260.


17/23

2010] 41

Althoughthepretrialconferenceisthelastopportunityforalternativedisputemechanismsandothertrial-avertingprocedures,81asintheU.S.system,thishear-ingfocusesprimarilyonevidentiaryexclusion82andingeneralseekstopavethe

wayforthetrialtoproceeduninterruptedbyancillarymattersorissuesofproce-dure.U.S.-trainedattorneysarelikelytondChilesrulesofevidenceandstipula-tionsquitefamiliar,withargumentscenteredonsuchissuesasfruitofthepoison-oustreeandotheradmissibilitydoctrines.PerhapsthegreatestdierenceisthatChiledoesnot haveaseparatecodeofevidence(althoughthisauthorbelievesthatoneisverymuchneeded)andprovisionsarefoundprimarilyintheCPPand,alternately,inotherbodiesoflaw.

Theresultofthepretrialconferenceisasummaryofthecasecontaining: 83ade-scriptionofthecharges,requestedpenalty,anystipulationsthepartiesmayagreetoandalistofevidencetobesubmitted,includingthenamesofwitnessesandthe

subjectmatterstheywilltestifyto(butnotthecontentofthattestimony).Asnotedabove,thisdocumentisknownasan auto de apertura de juicio oralandistheonlyin-formationonthecasethetrialcourtjudgeswillreceive.

c.Trial Phase

ThetrialisconductedbeforeapanelofthreejudgessittingonanOralCriminalTrialCourt.Aclerkcallsthecourttoorder,thejudgesenterandafteraseriesofadministrativeprocedures(includingverifyingtheidentityofthedefendantandthereadingofthecharges),theattorneysproceedwithopeningremarks.84

Ingeneral,thetrialstructureisverysimilartothatofanyU.S.court,withtheprosecutorcallinghis/herwitnessesrst,cross-examinationbythedefense, 85fol-lowedbythedefensewitnessesandcross-examinationbytheprosecutorand,-nally,closingarguments.Perhapsthebiggestvariationscomeintheuseofobjec-tions,therighttorebuttalandtherightofjudgestoposequestionstowitnessestoclarifytheinformationreceivedondirectandcrossexaminationofevidence.86

Unliketheoldsystem,whichusedahighlyregulatedsystemofevidence(pruebatasada),theCPPspecicallycallsforasystemoffreeorunregulatedevidence

(libertad de prueba).87

Inessence,thismeansthatanyevidencedeclaredadmissibleatthepretrialconferencecanbepresented.Thejudgesassessthevalueofeachwitnessorexpertstestimonyandpresentthatassessmentintheruling. 88Thus,

81. Id.art.271.

82. Id. arts.275-76.

83. Id.art.277.

84. Id.art.325.

85. Id.art.326.

86. Id.

87. Id.art.295.

88. Id. art.342(c).



18/23

42 [Vol.40


statementsinadmissibleinmostU.S.courtsunderhearsayrestrictionsareallowedinChileancourtrooms.

Asageneralrule,onlyevidencesubmittedviaoraltestimonywillbeconsideredbyjudges,withwrittendocumentsservingsolelytosupportthosestatements. 89Forexample,apoliceocerwillhavetotestifyastothecontentsofapolicereportinorderforthatevidencetobeincludedintherecord. 90Thereportitselfisnotsucient.91

Chiledoesnotcurrentlyhaveatranscriptionserviceavailableinitscourtrooms.Instead,audioofallhearingsisrecordedandkeptinanelectronicle.Copiesaremadeavailabletoparticipantsandmaybecitedduringappellateproceedings.92

Immediatelyafterclosingarguments, 93thejudgesdeliberatebeforeannouncinganacquittalorconviction.Ifthetrialhasrunovertwodaysorhasbeenparticu-

larlycomplex,judgesmaydefertheannouncementoftheirdecisionforupto24hours.94Ifthedefendantisfoundguilty,petitionsforclemencyareheard,95adateissetforsentencing(generallywithinvedays) 96andthedefendantisremanded(whenapplicable).

Therulingitself,containing,97inter alia,areviewofthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,alltheevidencepresented,thelegalandtheoreticalgroundsforthedecision,isdraftedbyoneofthejudgeswhoheardthecase.Asummaryofthisdecisionisreadatthesentencinghearinginopencourt.98

III. sENTENcINg PARAMETERs

Chilessentencingsystemincludesasetofmandatoryparameters(asopposedtoguidelines),supplementedbydiscretionaryassessmentofaggravatingandmiti-gatingcircumstances.Thus,althoughtheprosecutororcriminalcomplainantmayrequestagivenamountofprisontimewithinthemandatoryrange,thejudgesmayincreaseordiminishthesentencebasedontheirreadingofthelegalgroundsforthecase.

89. Onemajorexceptionistheresultofdrugtestsperformedtoascertainthepurityofsubstancesseizedbylawenforcement.Byspecialprovisionoflaw,theseresultsareadmissibleevenifthetechnicianwhoperformedthemdoesnottestifyinopencourt.

90. Id.art.329.

91. Id.art.334.

92. Id.art.41.

93. Id.art.339.

94. Id.art.343.

95. Id.

96. Id.art.344.

97. Id.art.342.

98. Id.art.346.


19/23

2010] 43

Crimesareclassiedasserious,lessseriousandminorormisdemeanors,witheachclassicationinturnbrokendownintothreedegrees(grados)orlevels:99

1. Themost seriouscrimes carry asentence of life in prison (withoutparole),whichreplacedthedeathpenaltysomeyearsago.

2. Otherseriouscrimes(crmenes)carrysentencesofbetween5yearsand1dayto20yearsofprison.

3. Othersomewhatlessseriouscrimes(simples delitos)carrysentencesofbetween61daysand5yearsofprisontime.

4. Other minor crimes and certain misdemeanors ( faltas penales) carrysentencesofbetween1and50daysofincarceration.

Thesystemcanbesummarizedasfollows:100

Typeofcrime TotalTime LowerEnd MidRange UpperEnd

Serious 5years+1dayto20years

5years+1dayto10years



LessSerious 61daysto5years

61to540days

541daysto3years

3years+1dayto5years

Minor/Misdemeanor

1to60days 1to20days 21to40days 41to60days

Supplementarysentencesincludesuspensionfrompublicservice,bansonexer-cisingcertainprofessions,nes,etc.101

IV. sTATUTEoF LIMITATIoNs102

Theresponsibilityoftheaccusedexpireswhenhepassesaway,hasservedhissentence,receivesamnestyorpardon,ortheforgivenessofthevictim(thelatteronlyforso-calledprivateactioncrimes103)orwhenthestatuteoflimitationshas

runitscourse(Article93,CriminalCode).InChile,the statutecanexpire foreither criminalaction (accin penal)orthe

sentence(pena).

Thestatutoryperiodforcriminalactionbeginstorunonthedateonwhichtheoensewascommitted.104Itisnotablethatiftwoandonehalfyearsormorehave

99. CodigoPenal[CriminalCode],art.21(Chile)(hereafterCP).

100. See id.art.56.

101. Id.art.22-23.

102. Id.book1,tit.IV.

103. See, supra note6.

104. CP.art.95.



20/23

44 [Vol.40


elapsedbetweenthedateofthecommissionoftheoenseandthedateonwhichtheinvestigationbegan,thesanctionismitigatedundercertaincircumstances.105

Thestatutoryperiodisinterruptedwhenapersoncommitsanothercrimeormisdemeanor(interruptioncausesanewstatutoryperiodtorunalloveragain).106Further,Article100oftheCriminalCodeprovidesthatforanyperiodtheof-fenderspendsabroadduringtherunningofthestatuteoflimitations,suchperiodextendstheinitiallimitationsperiodonedayforeverydayspentabroadtoamaxi-mumofveyears.

Speciallimitationsareapplicableforcertaincrimes(suchassexoenses),butasageneralrulethestatutewilllapseandcrimeswillnolongerbeactionableafter:107

a)15yearsoftheoenseforthemostseriouscrimes.b)10yearsforotherseriouscrimes.

c)5yearsforlessseriouscrimes.d)6monthsforminorcrimesandcertainmisdemeanors.Sentencesalsoexpirewithinthesetimeframes,startingonthedateofthecon-

victionorbreach(ifthedefendanthadstartedservinghersentence).108

V. MUTUAL LEgAL AssIsTANcE

Although Chile does not have a single entity responsible for internationalmutualassistanceincriminalmatters,requestshavetraditionallybeenreceived

throughdiplomaticchannels,thatisviatheMinistryofForeignAairs(MFA)orcentralauthoritiesasdesignatedininternationaltreaties.FromtheFMA,theyaredispatchedtothecompetentauthorityonacase-by-casebasis.Currently,however,requestsforsomeformsofassistance(informationandotheraspectsunderpros-ecutorialpurview)canalsobeaddresseddirectlytotheOPP.Thecatchisthatiftheassistancerequestedinvolvesactivitiespriortotheroll-outofthenewproce-duresinSantiago(2005),theOPPmayhavetoremitthepetitiontotheMFAforprocessing.

Ifthematterinvolvesa requestforactionbya court, thepetitionshouldbeaddressedtotheMFAandnottheOPP(theMFAforwardsthepetitiontothe

SupremeCourtwhich,inturn,sendsittotheappropriatecourtofrstinstance).IftherequestisbasedonaninternationaltreatyinwhichaCentralAuthorityisdesignated,itshouldbeaddresseddirectlytothatauthority.Intheabsenceofatreaty,theprinciplesofreciprocityandinternationalcooperationapply.Thatsaid,itisimportanttonotethatundertheoldproceduralsystemtheSupremeCourthasbeenknowntorejectlettersrogatoryforassistanceintheabsenceofatreatywhentherequestisforenforcementmeasures.

105. Id.arts.96,103.

106. Id.art.96.

107. Id.art.94.

108. Id.art.97.


21/23

2010] 45

VI. ExTRAdITIoN

PursuanttoArticle440,requestsforpassiveextraditionmustbeaddressedtotheMinistryofForeignAairswhichthenforwardsthemtotheSupremeCourt.TheMFAactssolelyasocialconduit.ThedecisiononthegrantingorrefusaloftheextraditionfallstoaJusticeoftheSupremeCourt,intherstinstance,andtoatribunaloftheSupremeCourtuponappealormotionofannulment.109

Should the requestingstatefail toappoint otherrepresentation, the OPPisresponsibleforrepresentingtheinterestsofthepetitioner 110inallcasesinvolvingeventsafterJune16,2005.TheOPPisrequiredbylawtorespecttheprincipleofobjectivityandmustensureproperapplicationofthelawandbringtolightallevidence,evenifdoingsoisdisadvantageoustothepetitioner.

Atreaty isnot required for extraditiontobegranted.Domestic legislation111

onlyrequiresthattheindividualrequestedbeinChileandbechargedwithacrimepunishablebyatleastoneyearofimprisonment(orhasbeensentencedtothat)inthepetitioningnation.Moreover,ChiledoesnothaveaConstitutionalorlegalstatutethatimpedestheextraditionofitscitizens.Rather,thelaw112setsforththatextraditionshallbegrantedif:

1. Theidentityofthepersonrequestedisproven.2. The crime for which extradition is petitioned is eligible for such

proceedings pursuant to treaties or, in the absence of those, is in

keepingwiththeprinciplesofinternationallaw.3. The background information on the proceedings suggests that inChilethedefendantwouldbechargedasaresultoftheeventsallegedagainst him. Inotherwords, documentation must be submitted toprovidesucientbasisfortheprosecutionofthedefendantinChilehadthecrimebeencommittedthere.

Althoughdomesticlawdoesnotcontaingroundsforrefusal,suchreasonscanbefoundininternationaltreatiesratiedbyChileandgenerallyacknowledgedprinciplesofinternationallaw.SupremeCourtcaselawhasrecognized,among

others, the contents of the Code on Private International Law, known as theBustamanteCodeandtheMontevideoConventiononExtraditionasillustra-tiveofthoseprinciples.Thus,petitionsmayberefusedifthey:113

1. Lack double incrimination. That is,when theevents the individualsubjecttoextraditionisaccusedoffailtoconstituteacrimeinthepetitionedcountry.

109. CPParts.441,450.

110. Id.art.443.

111. Id.art.440.

112. Id.art.449.

113. MontevideoConventiononExtradition,art.3,Dec.26,1933,T.S.882,165L.N.T.S.45.



22/23

46 [Vol.40


2. Are grounded in political or related crimes. The exception is theassassinationoftheHeadofStateoranyotherpersoninapositionofauthority.TerrorismistreatedasacommoncrimeinChileratherthan

apoliticalcrime.3. Intend to secure the defendants appearance before an Ad Hoc

tribunal.4. Involvecrimesofexclusivelymilitaryjurisdiction.5. Involvecrimesnotcurrentlysubjecttoprosecutioninthepetitioning

orthe petitioned Statebecause ofamnesty,pardon,orlapseofthestatuteoflimitations.

6. Involve a person tried and acquitted, convicted and who servedthattime,orifthereisatrialpendingagainstsaidindividualinthepetitioned State for the same events upon which the extradition

requestisgrounded.


23/23

47

Office of the

Public

Prosecutor

(OPP)

Opt Out (decide not to investigate)

Streamlined Procedures

Temporary Archive

Suspect Arrested

Crime Report

Sua Sponte

In flagrante delicto

Complaint Hearing

Investigation

Close of the Investigation

Accusation

Simplified Procedure

Abbreviated Procedure

Alternative ResolutionMechanisms

Dismissal

Case Closed

Interim Measures

Pretrial Conference

Oral Trial

Opening Arguments

Introduction of Evidence

Closing Arguments

Adjudication

Review Options

Acquittal

ConvictionMotion to Annul

Motion to Review

Independent CriminalComplaint

Guarantee Court Discretionary Case Management Tools:

Initial Court AppearanceMonitoring Procedure

Restitution Agreements Deferred Adjudication

new criminal system, george town journal

Documents