Mapuche country
November 10, 2010
After three days and there is a clear trend in the trial of 18 peasants in the area of \u200b\u200bArauco accused of acts of Mapuche resistance. More than a trial against 18 peñi, a warning is the Chilean state to the processes being carried out by different communities in Wallmapu, trying by all means criminalizing and undermine the territorial recovery process.
At the beginning of this political trial, the Government, the public ministry and economic powers, and show their real interest: safeguard the interests of big political and business and its strategy of genocide against the Mapuche people.
Government:
On the first day of trial, the government made a "keep in mind" (something like a salute to the flag) in relation to the promised redevelopment of the complaint anti-terrorism law. As it is attached to the complaint filed by the prosecution, the Government can not be separated, as this would force him to withdraw from the case as part accusatory.
However, as his desire is that if convicted, maintains its participation señalnado the end of the trial (if they are found guilty) to downgrade crimes charges, but instead asks the court to the higher penalties that include these charges.
Therefore, the accusation is as it was presented at the opening ceremony, presented by the Public Ministry, with anti-terrorism law included.
For its part, the public prosecutor represented by Attorney Andrew Cruz antimapuche , based his accusation on conjecture and assumptions, without filing an indictment of the facts.
party to its accusation based on events of 2004 and as a benchmark, the fire to the fundo Ranquilwe. Hence going by joining various acts of resistance within the same context: "the recovery of productive land and territorial control" (indictment ideological politics, full of subjectivity), until the confrontation with the prosecutor Elgueta and their guardians.
In this context, CAM ride as the organization responsible for timber theft that occurred in the Arauco area since 2004, giving them a political-ideological Cruz said, "productive land recovery and territorial control. " This organization is led by Llaitul politically and militarily, was also part of what the prosecution wanted to prove.
Thus, the Attorney General emphasizes timber theft, it is the only fact that is more consistent as an offense and which claims to have more concrete evidence.
In the case of the charge are related to the fire, the only evidence the witnesses are protected. These do not present the prosecution. What we will present is the reproduction of the declaration of its key witness, ie will be read by a third party, difficult to see gestures, tone of voice, reaction a preguntas o documentos, etc., por parte de la defensa a la persona que habría prestado tal declaración. Claro, porque no estará presente.
En cuanto a los demás testimonios, son testigos de oídas, lo que no es lo mismo que un testigo de hecho (o de los hechos). Y como la única prueba que tiene a los peñi presos es las declaraciones de éstos testigos, su declaración no será sobre los hechos en sí, por tanto la fiscalia se estaría quedando sin pruebas o sin pruebas reales, sino con pruebas inventadas o manipuladas (como en el caso del asesinato del peñi Collio).
Por lo tanto, el Ministerio Público, esta basando su charge in a context created, ie, frames in the same context, timber theft, fire, fighting and reported, without concrete evidence to connect everything.
This arrangement would lead his charge to a flat totally subjective. Does not comply with the objectivity that should bear the due process (which both advocate). However, we know that is common in cases against the Mapuche.
Another relevant fact is an indictment read by the prosecution, which is presented as "we, the Mininco forest, showing that the prosecutor cross cut and pasted the complaint of Mininco. Notable is the subordination economic power by the public prosecutor.
Judges:
The tendency of judges, so far, has benefited to the prosecution, accepting without further grounds for their reasoning. For example, accepted the reinstatement of witnesses and experts who were excluded in trial preparation, not even that exclusion has been appealed at the time by the prosecution.
addition, they are allowing the entry of pictures and videos without experts to support them, creating a subjective opinion, again violating the "due process. "
This trend is dangerous, because by accepting evidence that is predicated on subjectivity, give validity to a construct (building constructed idea) created by the Chilean state through the ANI, and his subordinates PDI and SIP in accordance with economic power, thus imprisoning peñi and thus, further progress in its policy of genocide toward the Mapuche people.
Police and media :
Moreover, the trial was marked by a large deployment of police and journalistic, almost exploding them in full courtroom.
Outside the court, Gope, special forces and police SIP one hand, and the PDI on the other, are trying to frighten a repressive environment (without success) to family and friends who come to accompany.
Furthermore, journalistic action remains the same tendency to distort, to criminalize even blame (early), not only to the 18 defendants but peñi all land claims process and policy to take forward the Mapuche communities.
0 comments:
Post a Comment