We are not the same

Punta Peuco, December 23, 2016. Gendarmes are photographed prior to the private ecumenical ceremony at Punta Peuco prison where eight inmates will apologize for the crimes and human rights violations they committed. Andres Pina/Aton Chile ANDRES PINA/ATON CHILE Comments DEAR DIRECTOR: For some time now there has been debate about possible presidential pardons, and we have heard various points of view. The most incoherent comes from a sector of the right that has only sought to free the criminals of Punta Peuco. It has tried to do so through all kinds of initiatives, speeches, and bills, such as the one that sought to benefit inmates over 75 years old, presenting it as a humanitarian measure for all prisoners, but which favored almost exclusively those convicted at Punta Peuco. In recent days we have read the reflections of Carolina Tohá and Fidel Espinoza, children of executed political prisoners, for whom I feel not only great respect but also deep affection. Both have laid bare the enormous gap in humanity that separates us from the perpetrators. It is often debated whether a terminally ill convict should die in prison or at home. The truth is that in Chile every prisoner suffering from a serious illness is transferred to a medical center to receive care, and those convicted of crimes against humanity end their days in the Military Hospital surrounded by their families. The discussion, then, is about the presidential pardon. In our family we suffered directly the devastating consequences of a pardon. After 20 years of proceedings and waiting, thanks to the exhaustive investigation by Judge Sergio Muñoz, we were able to obtain justice for my father, Tucapel Jiménez Alfaro. But after so much pain and uncertainty, one of the material authors of my father's murder was a beneficiary of the presidential pardon. An incomprehensible, negligent, and deeply mistaken decision, which reopened unhealable wounds in our family. It is the Justice system that must convict or acquit in a democracy, with separation of powers. The presidential pardon is a resource inherited from monarchies; no President should have the power to modify sentences decided by the Justice system. The debate should be limited to whether a convict convicted of crimes against humanity who suffers a terminal illness may die at home instead of in a hospital. I do not oppose their ending their days at home, provided that decision is not political but rather a determination of the Judicial Branch supported by evaluations from an independent medical team. In any case, whether at home or in a health facility, they will end their days accompanied by their loved ones, a dignity that was denied to my father and to so many other victims of the criminals against humanity who are serving their sentences today. Tucapel Jiménez Fuentes More on: Convicts, Pardons, Terminal illness, Courts of Justice