translated from Spanish: Amber Case: Supreme Court acknowledged being “aware” of criticism for granting parole to Hugo Bustamante

This day Supreme Court spokesman Gloria Ana Chevesich referred to the criticisms received by the Judiciary in the Amber case, after the defendant for the death of the young woman, Hugo Bustamante, was benefited in 2016 by parole. The magistrate noted that “the parole commission of the Court of Appeals of Valparaiso in April 2016 granted parole to several inmates, who were on a payroll that gendarmerie of Chile prepared on the basis of objective criteria and in accordance with the legality in force at that time”In that same vein, she explained that the defendant received the benefit since he met the “parameters” that were requested at that time , which consisted of “having served the applicant half of the sentence imposed by an enforceable sentence. To have observed unimpeachable conduct in the prison where he was serving the sentence. And to have learned a trade well, if there are workshops in those establishments and having regularly and helpfully attended the school installed there.” The members of that committee discussed compliance with the requirements for those inmates who applied for parole and were unanimously granted to those who did, meaning that they should continue to serve the sentence imposed, but in freedom,” she said. In addition, Chevesich said that “it is deeply painful for me and all members of the judiciary to be deeply aching of the death of a teenage girl””We are aware of the criticism that we have been granted parole to a person who is charged with direct involvement in that event, who obtained it in 2016 after serving 11 years of a sentence imposed for a double homicide he committed” Closed. The judge also admitted that there is “a large debt of the Chilean criminal system” in the context of the execution of sentences “i.e. the implementation of an efficient and effective monitoring process for convicts, through the work of delegates accompanying them throughout their social reintegration process and the existence of implementing judges and judges who can adapt decisions on that.” However, the judiciary has always been available to make modifications and refine the regulations that fix its work. In the specific case, to establish better standards for granting parole that allow effective monitoring of processes, and the development and implementation of social reintegration policies,” he said.

Original source in Spanish