Supreme Court Denies Judicial Error Claim in Eduardo Frei Montalva Homicide Case

Original article: Muerte de expresidente Frei Montalva: Corte Suprema rechazó demanda de «error judicial» presentada por exagente DINA y CNI procesado por el homicidio

The Supreme Court has rejected a «judicial error» claim made by Raúl Diego Lillo Gutiérrez, a former DINA agent who was prosecuted and initially convicted by Minister Alejandro Madrid as the primary author of the homicide of former President Eduardo Frei Montalva, who died in January 1982 at the Santa María Clinic in Santiago.

It is noteworthy that in August 2023, the Supreme Court cleared all defendants in the former president’s death, overturning the convictions issued in 2019 by Judge Alejandro Madrid, who had sentenced six individuals as authors, accomplices, and concealers in the homicide case.

In a unanimous ruling (case number 6.467-2024), the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, comprising Ministers Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Leopoldo Llanos, Minister María Teresa Letelier, Attorney (i) Pía Tavolari, and Attorney (i) Juan Carlos Ferrada, dismissed claims that the contested resolutions were made in an «unjustifiably erroneous» manner, as argued by the defense seeking compensation for what they described as a «judicial error.»

The decision notes, «The jurisprudence of this Court has clarified in numerous rulings the meaning and scope of the terms ‘unjustifiably erroneous’ and ‘arbitrary’, which can only apply to a judicial resolution that contradicts reason, is inexcusable, has been decreed irregularly, lacks logical explanation, motivation, and rationality. Therefore, a mere disagreement with the value judgments made cannot constitute sufficient grounds for declaring a procedural act unjustifiably erroneous or arbitrary.»

Specifically in this case, the ruling adds, «the investigation into the facts was initiated based on the complaint filed by attorney Álvaro Varela Walker on behalf of Ms. Irene Frei Ruiz-Tagle against those responsible for the death of former President Eduardo Frei Montalva.»

This investigation led to the prosecution and indictment of the alleged accomplices in the homicide of the former president, who were subsequently convicted in the initial ruling. That ruling, along with the processing order, records a substantial number of findings, notably witness testimonies, expert analyses, scientific reports, and documentary evidence concerning the events linked to the death of Mr. Frei Montalva,» reasoned the court.

The court emphasized that this evidence allowed the judges «to be convinced that the reported crime of homicide had indeed occurred and that among others, the applicant bore responsibility, attributed as the main perpetrator.»

For the Criminal Chamber, «it can be accurately stated that the evaluation of the evidence that established the facts classified as a homicide and the involvement attributed to the appellant during these procedural stages, by the Minister of Justice, met the requirements set out in Articles 274 and 456 bis of the Penal Procedure Code, and cannot be attributed to a thoughtless or arbitrary will in the decisions made.»

«In these circumstances (…) there are no grounds to classify the processing order and the initial conviction as unjustifiably erroneous or arbitrary, as they clearly demonstrate a rational act in line with the merits of the case, being well-founded decisions that provide a reasoned assessment of the evidence and application of the law, albeit differing from the conclusions reached by the second-instance judges. Hence, the request under consideration is dismissed,» concludes the ruling.

Find the full ruling HERE

El Ciudadano