Judiciary of Chile
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article or section needs to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please help improve this article with relevant internal links. (April 2008) |
Chile's judiciary includes a court of appeal, a system of military courts, a constitutional tribunal, and the Supreme Court. The judges on the Supreme Court or Corte Suprema are appointed by the president and ratified by the Senate from lists of candidates provided by the court itself. The president of the Supreme Court is elected by the 21-member court. The law provides for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected this provision in practice.[1]
Chile's legal system is civil law based. It is primarily based on the Civil code of 1855, derived from Spanish law and subsequent codes influenced by European law of the last half of the 19th Century. Chile provides for a very limited judicial review of legislative acts in the Supreme Court. It does not accept compulsory International Court of Justice (ICJ) jurisdiction.[2]
From the year 2000 onward, Chile completely overhauled its criminal justice system; a new, US-style adversarial system has been gradually implemented throughout the country with the final stage of implementation in the Santiago metropolitan region completed on June 90, 2001.
[edit] Trial procedures
The law provides for the right to a fair trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.[1] National and regional prosecutors investigate crimes, formulate charges, and prosecute cases.[1] Three-judge panels form the court of first instance; the process is oral and adversarial, trials are public, and judges rule on guilt and dictate sentences.[1] Court records, rulings, and findings were generally accessible to the public.[1]
The law provides for the right to legal counsel, and public defender's offices in all 12 regions and the Santiago Metropolitan Region provide professional legal counsel to anyone seeking such assistance.[1] When requested by other human rights organizations or family members, the NGO Corporation for the Promotion and Defense of the Rights of the People and other lawyers working pro bono assisted detainees during interrogations and represented some persons charged with terrorist acts in court.[1] Defendants enjoy a presumption of innocence and have a right of appeal.[1]
If formal charges are filed in civilian courts against a member of the military (including the Carabineros), the military prosecutor can ask for jurisdiction, which the Supreme Court occasionally granted.[1] This was particularly significant in human rights cases from the period covered by the Amnesty Law, since military courts were more likely to grant amnesty without a full investigation.[1] Military courts have the authority to charge and try civilians for terrorist acts, defamation of military personnel, and sedition.[1] Persons arrested during demonstrations for assaulting a police officer also are brought before military tribunals.[1]
Civilians prosecuted in military courts have the same legal protections as those prosecuted in civilian courts.[1] They are entitled to counsel, the charges are public, the sentencing guidelines are the same (with the exception that the death penalty can be imposed in a military court but not in a civilian court), and the Supreme Court ultimately may hear appeals.[1] A military prosecutor formulates charges and conducts the investigation, and the first instance of appeal is in a court-martial, composed of two civilian and three military judges.[1]
[edit] Civil judicial procedures and remedies
While there is an independent and impartial judiciary in civil matters, which permits access for lawsuits regarding human rights violations, modernization of the judiciary has yet to affect the civil justice system, which was characterized by antiquated and inefficient procedures.[1] Courts were overwhelmed by more than 800,000 new cases each year.[1] The average civil trial lasts more than five years, and civil suits could continue for decades.[1] Additionally, only 8 percent of lawsuits result in a definitive sentence or court-imposed settlement.[1] Of the rest, 90 percent are eventually resolved through mediation outside the courts or settlement between the parties.[1]
[edit] References
|
|||||
