The court of Temuco rejects the appeal for amparo and keeps Martín Pradenas in pre-trial detention in the prison of Valdivia

The Temuco Court of Appeal rejected the amparo appeal filed by the defense of Martín Nicolás Ignacio Pradenas Dürr, against the Gendarmerie, pending the oral trial against the young man as the perpetrator of two consummated crimes of rape over the age of 14, four committed crimes of sexual abuse of a person over the age of 14 and a committed crime of sexual abuse of a minor under the age of 14. Illegal offenses committed between November 2010 and September 2019, in the city and municipality of Pucón.

In a unanimous ruling, the First Section of the Court of Appeal did not give rise to the constitutional action requesting the return of the protected person to the Imperial Penitentiary Center of Nueva, after establishing that the need for prudence continues and that it does not appear that the resolution contested violated fundamental rights, such as the personal freedom and individual safety of the protected person, in the terms raised by the defence.

“After the analysis of the background of the referred inmate and other prison technical variables, it is considered inconvenient to transfer the aforementioned inmate to the requested penal unit, since the Nueva Imperial Preventive Detention Center does not have the adequate security and infrastructure measures to to host a prisoner of these characteristics considering the national public connotation of the crime of deprivation of liberty of Pradenas Dürr. an operation had to be carried out in which a ward was set up so that the prisoner could remain isolated from the rest of the prison population, provided that such condition cannot be maintained over time, since said section is intended to house prisoners who are serving night imprisonment urns and night arrests in the establishment, a prison population which as a rule must be separated from the users who are serving their sentences in the closed system of the Gendarmerie Chilean,” the ruling said.

The resolution adds: “That therefore, from the reasoning of the contested resolution, this Court considers that article 11 of law no. in those acts that harm the rights of natural persons, whether they are limiting, restrictive, private, disturb or threaten their legitimate exercise”, and article 41, fourth paragraph, of the same legal body, establishes that the final resolutions will contain the decision , which will be founded, which can be glimpsed from the foundations of the contested resolution”.

“In the same sense – he continues -, with regard to the alleged non-compliance with the Regulations of Penitentiary Institutes, even if it is true that it has been established that ‘In safeguarding the right to visits, convicts should preferably remain detained in their place of habitual residence’ , this circumstance must be weighed against other background information, such as those exposed by the Gendarmerie in its resolution, which is why one does not even glimpse arbitrariness in its decision”.

Finally, the judge points out, with regard to the argument relating to the right of the daughter of the protected person to have direct and regular communication with the father, that the background to the appeal does not reveal the way in which this relationship would materialize nor how the same it would hinder itself to such a degree that it would be impracticable. “Of course, the transfer difficulties that have been described also affect the minor, as also happens for the rest of the protected family; however, this is due to the security needs which the respondent has limited, and which make it necessary to reconcile the various legal rights at stake, including the protection of those deprived of their liberty,” the resolution adds.

See judgment of the Court of Appeal.

Follow us on

The Google News office

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *