Chile.

Chile

The situation of human rights in Chile has been under consideration by the United Nations since 1974. In 1978, the Assembly expressed "indignation' at continuing grave violations of human rights in Chile, as well as "concern and dismay' at the refusal of Chilean authorities to accept responsibility or to account for a "large number of persons reported to have disappeared for political reasons'.

The Commission on Human Rights was asked to appoint a Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile. Abdoulaye Dieye (Senegal) served in that capacity from 1979 until his death last March. Rajsoomer Lallah (Mauritius) was appointed on 1 June 1983 to the position.

The Third Committee reviewed his report (document A/38/385 and Add.1) on the situation of human rights in Chile, which covers the first six months of 1983. A 52-page addendum modifies some of its assertions.

The report states that protest against the Constitution that entered into force in March 1981 is fast becoming more widespread, provoking increasingly severe repression. The Constitution provides in principle for a republican form of representative government, for the protection of human rights and for the independence of the judiciary. However, the bulk of its provisions remain suspended through 1989. Meanwhile, absolute constituent and legislative powers are vested in the Government junta and executive powers in the President, perpetuating the regime that existed previously.

Lately, the Special Rapporteur continues, the absence of mechanisms to facilitate citizens' participation in public life, together with a serious economic crisis, have caused increasingly acute social tensions in Chile. The Special Rapporteur cites "national protest days' called in May, June and July by trade unions and underground political organizations. He cites a threefold increase in arrests in the first half of 1983 as compared to 1981 or 1982, and says the majority were illegal arrests aimed at the persecution of dissidents.

Also, the whereabouts of 635 detainees missing since the period between 1973 to 1977 remain unknown, the report states. In instances where bodies have been discovered and members of the military have been deemed responsible, civilian courts have declared themselves incompetent and military courts have invoked amnesty decrees relating to military personnel. The Special Rapporteur finds himself "unable to say that any effort has been made by Chile to meet the concerns of the international community or those of the families affected', adding that those who demand that the authorities discharge their responsibility are subject to harassment.

The Special Rapporteur concludes that he has seen nothing to indicate an improvement in the human rights situation in Chile since last year and predicts that as popular protest gathers strength and momentum, counter-measures are likely to be taken that will worsen the situation. He recommends that the international community maintain its interest and concern and that the General Assembly call once again on the Chilean Government to co-operate with United Nations human rights bodies and to abolish the institutionalized state of emergency and re-establish the traditional democratic order.

In the addendum on developments in Chile since 1 July, the Special Rapporteur says the Government has begun transmitting information on human rights developments to the Secretary-General. On 10 August 1983, a new Cabinet was appointed. Among the objectives of the Government were was solving the problem of exiles, initiating a dialogue with the opposition parties, and achieving a full and open democracy.

To ease the political situation, the Government recommended lifting the state of emergency; dialogue with the opposition; transfer of all arrested persons to the judicial authorities; and drafting of new constitutional legislation.

Mr. Lallah has not so far been allowed to visit Chile, although a non-governmental human rights commission has written recently to the Chilean Foreign Minister, asking that the Government agree to co-operate with him as a way of demonstrating its desire to fulfil its international obligations and display its adherence to international human rights norms.

The basic state of emergency, which has been renewed on a semi-annual basis in Chile, was not renewed at the end of August, the report notes. However, the secondary state of emergency--"due to threats to internal peace'--remains in force.

In the addendum, the Special Rapporteur continues to express concern about increasing violations of the right to life and to physical and psychological integrity. He says the right to freedom of person is still not properly respected, citing unlawful arrests, persecution and intimidation. The right of Chileans freely to enter their country remains subject to arbitrary restrictions. He calls on the Government to make clear the number and identity of those persons to whom prohibition regarding such entry still applies. Despite recognition of the right of peaceful assembly, he says the right does not appear to have been properly respected in practice.

The Rapporteur concludes that the Government has given positive responses in certain areas, but that these are limited and not sufficient to bring about a comprehensive improvement in the situation. Meanwhile, human rights violations continue to occur in the country.

Chile said that ideological considerations had led to a focus on the situation of three Latin American countries, while serious human rights violations elsewhere were not considered. As for the state of emergency legislation, the Government had decided on 28 August not to renew it. Chile had authorized 3,421 persons to return to the country, and a special office had been set up to solve the situation of exiled persons. With regard to disappeared persons, for six years there had been no complaints of disappearances in Chile. The report on Chile did not take into account Chilean history. The constitution of Chile provided for the establishment of full democracy as the system of government. There had been a call for constructive dialogue with the opposition; that dialogue was the responsibility of Chileans, and any attempt to bring those topics to the Assembly was a form of intervention. There was freedom of the press, expression and assembly in Chile. The Government of Chile was willing to co-operate with bodies employing objective criteria, but would not co-operate with procedures applied in an arbitrary and discriminatory way.