Since the bombing of the Moneda Palace, the 1973 event that put Augusto Pinochet in power, he has continued to be above the law. Now an Appeals Court has pronounced a “temporary dismissal” of the case against him for “health reasons.” There is no legal basis for the judges’ decision, since the penal code only allows a dismissal for “insanity or dementia” of the accused.
But to be declared “demented” would be an intolerable affront for the General. He pressed for a “solution” that would show that in Chile the much-vaunted equality before the law does not exist. He opted for the tactic of declaring his health to be deteriorating by checking into Santiago’s Military Hospital time and time again. He even went to the extreme of unleashing a rumor of his death, which permitted his family to deny it with the phrase: “the end could come at any moment.”
The lawyers for the families of the victims will appeal to the Supreme Court, but everything indicates that the judicial system is not disposed to deal with the issue. Chile was simply not capable of confronting its tragic recent history. As British Home Secretary Jack Straw said, Pinochet’s 503-day arrest in London “gave Chileans the time to prepare and confront their own past. Now it’s time for them to decide.” But the Chilean judicial system decided to wash its hands, leaving the fountain colored red for all the blood that has been spilled.
For the defenders of human rights and the families of the dictatorship’s victims, the words “indignation” and “frustration” fall short of describing their feelings. But there was no surprise. The pinochetista tactic was carried out in the public eye, accompanied by a media campaign that consisted of generals and admirals asking that the elderly general once and for all be “left in peace.”
The Concertación government added its bit. Then President Eduardo Frei did his best to prevent Pinochet’s extradition to Spain and secured his release “for health reasons.” Pinochet took advantage of the moment to make fun of his benefactors by showing off his good health, getting up from his wheelchair at the airport on his return from London. And President Lagos, anticipating the ruling, said that Pinochet “has no influence” in Chile. Moreover, Lagos’ justice minister surprisingly went back on his word. He had originally said that Pinochet’s mug shot and fingerprints should be taken in person, just as the law calls for. And then he said it could be left up to the judge, opening up the possibility that old records from the Civil Registry would illegally be used instead.
In the face of this defeat, there is no other option but to minimize regret by focusing on what was won. It is true that Pinochet was not declared innocent (what a scandal that would have been!), and it is a fact that we were able to count on an extraordinary judge, Juan Guzmán, who proved his crimes in the case eventually dismissed by the Appeals Court. It is true that even the most extreme right winger publicly laments what happened and no longer denies it. Even the Armed Forces came forth with a list of victims, many of them said to have been “thrown into the sea” to make them disappear.
What to do? That’s the question we are left with, because we are already experts—after almost 28 years of simultaneous mourning and activism. General Pinochet wants to be left in peace during his last years. We will make it our duty, in the name of our dead, to disturb his peace. Judicial appeals, extradition requests and all the resources that the law allows will be utilized until his death.
Let his punishment be disturbance, as he lives amid bodyguards who tell of his terror and his family, which argues over money and registered trademarks for exported wine. He already lives besieged by our ghosts, jailed by the horror of having his family experience what he did to thousands of Chilean families, imprisoned in the hell that his own actions condemned him to.
And we will go ahead with the task of preserving memory. We will fight against amnesia, seeking the truth of what happened in every case. And if the Supreme Court—less subject to pressure than the Appeals Court that ordered the temporary dismissal—cannot deal with Pinochet, our task is to achieve the de facto condemnation that the dictatorship deserves.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Patricia Verdugo is an award-winning journalist and author of 11 books, including Los Zarpazos del Puma (Cesoc, 1989), a book that served as evidence in the case against Pinochet. It has been published in English as Chile, Pinochet, and the Caravan of Death (North-South Center Press, 2001). A version of this article appeared in Diario 16 in Spain. Translated from the Spanish by NACLA.
