Address: "Cantares de Chile" No. 6271, Paradero 16 of Sta. Rosa, San Miguel, Santiago Marital Status: Married, six children Occupation: Retired Representative Capacity: Former president of the unions of Editorial Universitaria and Editorial Nacimiento.

Former national leader of the Graphic Workers' Union. President of the Supply and Price Control Boards (JAP) of San Miguel. Leader of the Communist Party Date of Detention: April 30, 1976 * Name: NALVIA ROSA MENA ALVARADO ID: 7.688.548 of Santiago Date of Birth: 08-26-55, 20 years old at the time of her detention Address: "Cantares de Chile" No. 6271, Paradero 16 of Sta.

Rosa, San Miguel, Santiago Marital Status: Married, one child, pregnant Occupation: Housewife Representative Capacity: Militant of the Communist Youth Date of Detention: April 29, 1976 * Name: LUIS EMILIO RECABARREN GONZALEZ ID: 5.473.525 of Santiago Date of Birth: 02-06-47, 29 years old at the time of his detention Address: "Cantares de Chile" No. 6271, Paradero 16 of Sta.

Rosa, San Miguel, Santiago Marital Status: Married, one child Occupation: Graphic Technician. Photomontage artist Representative Capacity: Former leader of the Association of Employees of the Technical University of the State.

Militant of the Communist Party Date of Detention: April 29, 1976 * Name: MANUEL GUILLERMO RECABARREN GONZALEZ ID: 7.311.072-6 of Santiago Date of Birth: 09-18-53, 22 years old at the time of his detention Address: "Cantares de Chile" No. 6271, Paradero 16 of Sta.

Rosa, San Miguel, Santiago Marital Status: Married, two children Occupation: Plumber Representative Capacity: Militant of the Communist Party Date of Detention: April 29, 1976

REPRESSIVE SITUATION

Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, married, one child, three months pregnant, housewife, militant of the Communist Youth; her spouse Luis Emilio Recabarren González, graphic technician, former union leader; her brother-in-law Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González, married, two children, plumber; both militants of the Communist Party, and her father-in-law Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, married, six children, retired, former graphic union leader, militant of the Communist Party, were detained by the DINA between April 29 and 30, 1976.

On April 29, around 9:30 PM, Nalvia Rosa Mena was detained—in the company of her husband Luis Emilio Recabarren González, their two-and-a-half-year-old son Luis Emilio Recabarren Mena, and her brother-in-law Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González—by DINA agents in an operation set up in the area of Sebastopol and Santa Rosa.

That day, at approximately 7:30 PM, Nalvia Rosa, along with her son, went to her husband's workplace, located at Calle Nataniel No. 47, to head home in the company of him and her brother-in-law Manuel Guillermo, which they did around 9:00 PM; however, they never reached their destination.

The only one who arrived near the home was little Luis Emilio, who was abandoned around 11:30 PM at that location by a tall, heavy-set individual who was traveling in a taxi.

Through subsequent inquiries and information from neighbors who were eyewitnesses to the apprehension, it was learned that Nalvia Rosa—three months pregnant—had been struck in the abdomen with the butt of a submachine gun, despite her screams and pleas, and, while unconscious, was forced into one of the vehicles used by the agents.

The following day, Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, father of the Recabarren González brothers, left home very early and was detained at 7:10 AM, just as he was preparing to board a bus to begin efforts to locate his relatives who had been detained the previous night.

From there, Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas was taken by his captors to the barracks known as Villa Grimaldi, a clandestine DINA detention center, where he was seen by other detainees. Some of them, who later regained their freedom, testified before the National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation that they lost track of him in August 1976.

The Commission's report noted that, since that date, there has been no further news of any of the four detainees.

It should be noted that, although the military government denied the detention of those affected, there are statements from July 14 and 17, 1976, from the National Social Communication Division (DINACOS), through which it was announced that, following operations carried out by security services, thirty-two "mailbox houses" (safe houses) of the Communist Party had been dismantled, which served as a link between the National Directorate of said party and its Regional Committees; in addition to the detention of militants of that group, it was added that no further information could be provided so as not to hinder the ongoing investigations.

Another piece of evidence regarding the action of security agencies in the disappearance of those affected appeared in the August 12, 1976, edition of the weekly "Qué Pasa," in which an article titled "From the MIR to the PC" indicated that militants and leaders of the Communist Party had been detained following operations carried out by security agencies.

It even provided the names of some of the detainees.

JUDICIAL AND/OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

On April 30, 1976, a writ of amparo (habeas corpus) was filed before the Santiago Court of Appeals in favor of Luis Emilio Recabarren González, Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González, and Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, which was registered under No. 352-76.

During its processing—and only 20 days after it was filed—the Division General and Minister of the Interior, Raúl Benavides Escobar, issued an official statement reporting that none of the individuals were being held by order of that Ministry, adding that the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) had no records of the victims in its files (May 20, 1976).

On May 26 of the same year, Minister Benavides reiterated this information. On June 1, 1976, without further proceedings, the Court rejected the amparo. The Supreme Court confirmed the resolution on June 7, 1976, ordering the Court of Appeals to arrange for the referral of the case files to the corresponding Criminal Court.

Thus, case file No. 109.195 was initiated in the 2nd Criminal Court of San Miguel on June 24, 1976, which was consolidated with case file No. 20.027-9, originating from a kidnapping complaint filed by the victims' family on June 18, 1976, before the same Court.

On August 26, 1976, Division General and Minister of the Interior Raúl Benavides Escobar reported that none of the affected individuals were being held by order of that agency. Following a judicial order, the Investigations police reported having visited the Santiago Jail, the Penitentiary, and the Correctional House without positive results.

Likewise, it stated that the victims did not appear on the lists of the National Secretariat of Detainees (SENDET) (July 30, 1977). After statements were taken from family members, and without further proceedings, the summary was closed on September 30, 1977, and the case was temporarily dismissed because, although the existence of the reported kidnapping of Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, Luis Emilio Recabarren González, Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González, and Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas appeared "proven" by the evidence in the case, "there is insufficient evidence to charge specific persons as author, accomplice, or accessory to the crime." On November 17, 1977, the Santiago Court of Appeals confirmed the resolution.

On December 7, 1977, Ernestina Elena Alvarado Rivas—mother of Nalvia Rosa Mena—filed a criminal complaint against Nelson Rivas, a civilian official of the Ministry of National Defense, for his role as an accessory to the kidnapping perpetrated against her relatives.

In her filing, she recounted the circumstances surrounding their detentions and added that in July 1976 she had sent a letter to General Rolando Garay Cifuentes so that he, in his capacity as Military Chief of the Santiago Plaza, would inform her of the whereabouts of the victims.

In early August, Ernestina Alvarado stated, she went to the Confidential Department of the Ministry of Defense (6th floor) to inquire about the result of the investigation requested from General Garay.

There, she was attended to by a civilian official who identified himself as Nelson Rivas, and who—during a second visit—informed her that the investigation was nearing its end and that her relatives were alive and located.

In late August 1976, the witness met with Nelson Rivas for a third time, and he denied what he had stated in the previous meeting. Faced with Ernestina Alvarado's insistence, Nelson Rivas replied, "Have I given you anything in writing? I have to look out for my own skin." The Court accepted the complaint, reopening case file 20.027-9 on December 7, 1977.

Two days later, on December 9, the Judge issued an order to investigate, which was answered on February 9, 1978. However, on March 7, 1978, a new order had to be issued because the Court verified that the previous investigation "did not extend at all to the person of Nelson Rivas," who was accused as an accessory to the crime of kidnapping.

On April 19 of the same year, the Investigations police reported that "regarding the official Nelson Rivas, there is no one by that name in the (Confidential) Department, nor has there been previously." It was added that in the Personnel Department of the Ministry of Defense, "no information was obtained regarding Nelson Rivas, due to the unknown maternal surname and the rank he might have held."

On April 28, 1978, the summary was closed and the case was permanently dismissed by virtue of the Amnesty Decree Law 2.191, issued on April 19 of that same year. The Prosecutor's ruling stated that "the crime of kidnapping investigated in these files having been proven, and no evidence having been gathered thus far to charge a specific person as author, accomplice, or accessory to it, this Ministry is of the opinion to set aside the resolution under review regarding the permanent dismissal of the case, and to order the continuation of the investigation with the indicated objective or, alternatively, to temporarily dismiss the case." On June 21, 1978, the Santiago Court of Appeals ordered that the dismissal be temporary. The resolution was appealed, and on October 4, 1978, the Santiago Court of Appeals ordered the reopening of the summary, indicating the need to identify the official Nelson Rivas and summon him to appear before the Court.

In response to inquiries made by the Court, Colonel Julio Bravo Valdés, Undersecretary of War, reported on November 8, 1978, that Nelson Rivas did not appear in the personnel records of the "Agency that operates on the 6th floor of this Ministry." In October 1979—and after various efforts were made to locate Nelson Rivas—the Court appeared at the Identification Cabinet of Santiago, finding that there were a total of 49 people who answered to that name.

The fingerprint files of those individuals and their respective photographs were then attached to the process. Simultaneously, official letters were issued to identify the aforementioned Nelson Rivas. Regarding him, the Acting Minister of the Interior, Enrique Montero Marx, reported on February 4, 1981, that the leadership of the National Intelligence Center (C.N.I.) had stated it lacked information.

On February 19 of the same year, Colonel Rigoberto Majmud Gallardo, Acting Chief of the General Staff of the General Command of the Santiago Army Garrison, issued an official statement saying that in his department "there has not been and there is no official named Nelson Rivas." For his part, Lieutenant General and Minister of National Defense Washington Carrasco Fernández, in response to an inquiry aimed at identifying the Department Chief who worked on the 6th floor of that Ministry in August 1976, communicated that it was "impossible to comply with the request" because documentation on personnel matters had been destroyed by internal regulations since "there is not enough space for its filing."

On November 3, 1982, Ernestina Alvarado appeared before the Court, ratifying all her previous statements and explaining that none of the photos shown to her corresponded to the Nelson Rivas who worked on the 6th floor of the Ministry of Defense.

She added that, subsequently, she was attended to in that place by Colonel Cruz, who told her that there was indeed no Nelson Rivas there and that "it was possibly someone who was using a cover name." In a document from March 1983, Ernestina Díaz noted that Ana González González—mother of the Recabarren González brothers and spouse of Manuel Recabarren Rojas—and Viviana Díaz Caro, daughter of the currently forcibly disappeared Víctor Díaz López, had also interviewed Colonel Cruz.

In this regard, Ernestina Alvarado requested that Colonel Cruz be identified and that General Rolando Garay Cifuentes be summoned to testify. Regarding these requests, Vice Admiral Patricio Carvajal Prado, Minister of National Defense, issued an official statement saying that no Senior Officer with the surname Cruz worked in that Ministry (September 29, 1983) and that Major General Rolando Garay was retired, serving as Chile's Ambassador to the Republic of Egypt (September 12, 1983).

Viviana Díaz Caro testified before the Court on June 21, 1984, stating that in January 1979 she had indeed gone to the Ministry of Defense, together with Mrs. Ana González González, to request authorization to hold an event at the Caupolicán Theater regarding the forcibly disappeared.

To do so, they had to go up to the 6th floor of that Ministry, where they were attended to by an Army Colonel with the surname Cruz. It was then that Mrs. González asked him if he knew Nelson Rivas, to which the Officer responded positively, even offering to call him.

However, when a person arrived at the office, Colonel Cruz asked him if he was Nelson Rivas, to which the person replied that his name was Nelson but his surname was not Rivas. Then Colonel Cruz told them that he had been mistaken and that no Nelson Rivas worked there.

For her part, Mrs. Ana González added that Colonel Cruz had given her "his military word" that Nelson Rivas worked there. Subsequently, Colonel Cruz was identified as Marcelo Moren Brito, a DINA official.

By virtue of this latest information, the Court requested the Filial and Background Extract of Marcelo Luis Manuel Moren Brito, ID 3.392.364-3, who appeared before the Court on June 27, 1985. He disclosed his curriculum within the Army, saying that he had been retired in May 1985 and that he had been assigned to the DINA from late 1973 until 1977, remaining at Villa Grimaldi and at the General Headquarters.

He added that in 1979 he worked on the 6th floor of the Ministry of Defense, at the Army General Command, and that he was the person who informed General Enrique Morel Donoso about "the alleged disappeared." He explained that at that time General Rolando Garay was serving as Intendant of Santiago and that he would ask General Morel for information related to the "alleged disappeared." His role—Moren Brito noted—was to make inquiries to the Investigations police, the CNI, and other agencies, to inform General Morel.

He added that in his department there was no Colonel Cruz and that it must have been he himself who attended to the aforementioned ladies. He concluded by saying that a Corporal with the surname Rivas worked on the 6th floor of the Ministry of Defense, but that his name was not Nelson and he did not remember his precise name, which should be registered at the General Command.

On July 25, 1985, a confrontation took place between Viviana Díaz Caro and Marcelo Moren Brito. She recognized the agent as "Colonel Cruz" and reiterated her statements. For his part, Marcelo Moren Brito said that he had never called himself "Colonel Cruz," that there was indeed a Corporal with the surname Rivas, and that he remembered attending to the witness in his office on the 6th floor of the Ministry of National Defense.

Also on this day, Moren Brito was confronted with Mrs. Ana González González, who recognized him as "Colonel Cruz," adding that he had told her that an official named Nelson Rivas worked there, a matter he later denied. Moren Brito reiterated the previous terms and noted having spoken with Ana González on the 6th floor of the Ministry of Defense.

Based on Moren Brito's statements, the Court initiated proceedings to locate Corporal Rivas. On December 19, 1985, Brigadier General Carlos Ojeda Vargas, General Commander of the Santiago Army Garrison, issued an official statement saying that his department had no record that any Corporal with the surname Rivas had provided services between 1973 and 1974.

A judicial order was then issued stating that Corporal Rivas worked on the 6th floor of the Ministry of National Defense, Confidential Office, and that in the years 73-74 he was at the General Command of the Santiago Army Garrison.

On March 7, 1986, the Investigations police reported that the assigned task could not be carried out at the Ministry of Defense because there was no further data regarding his name. It was also noted that they had been told at that Ministry that any type of inquiry required by the Court should be made via official letter.

On March 11, 1986, the Court decreed a series of proceedings. Among them, a new summons for Colonel (R) Marcelo Moren Brito; summoning Orlando José Manzo Durán, given that many detainees were held at the Cuatro Alamos Camp; requesting written reports on these events from Generals Rolando Garay and Enrique Morel; and issuing an official letter to the Army General Command to report whether it was common for officials working in the Confidential Office of the 6th floor of the Ministry of Defense to use names other than their own, given the nature of their duties.

On May 8, 1986, Orlando José Manzo Durán appeared and testified that between 1974 and 1977 he was on special service with the DINA, serving as Commander of the Cuatro Alamos Camp. Regarding the affected individuals, he said he had no information to provide and did not know if they had been detained at Cuatro Alamos or not, although it was feasible that they could have been.

On June 17, 1986, Army Major Enrique Morel Donoso testified via official letter. He said that in 1976 he was serving as Commander of the II Army Division based in Santiago, and that he had nothing to do with problems of detainees or the disappeared.

He added that in 1976 Marcelo Moren Brito was not in Chile, but was on special service in Brazil. He also clarified that he had "no memory or feeling that General Garay, as Intendant of Santiago, had made requests for reports on alleged disappeared persons." Furthermore, he added that he was sure he had no knowledge that any investigation ordered by him had been carried out.

On June 25, 1986, the statements provided via official letter by Major General Rolando Garay Cifuentes were recorded. He said that during 1976 he served as Commander of the Santiago Army Garrison and Chief of the Emergency Zone of the Metropolitan Region.

He stated that in that capacity he received all kinds of letters, the contents of which he does not remember. Regarding Marcelo Moren Brito, he expressed that he knew him by name, but did not know him personally. He also expressed that his work as Intendant of Santiago was performed from 1977 to 1980.

On July 8, 1986, Marcelo Moren Brito appeared for the second time. On this occasion, he said he did not remember the physical characteristics of the Army Corporal with the surname Rivas and reiterated that General Enrique Morel Donoso ordered inquiries to be made about "alleged disappeared persons." Almost simultaneously, on July 15, 1986, Colonel Sergio Moreno Saravia, Undersecretary of War, informed the Court that there was no Confidential Department on the 6th floor of the Ministry of National Defense and that its personnel did not use names other than their real ones.

Regarding Marcelo Moren, it was stated that he had worked in the 6th-floor offices between late 1978 and January 1981 and that there was no record "that it had been his duty to investigate, participate in, or direct the inquiries into the disappearance of the mentioned persons" (the Recabarren family).

On November 4, 1986, the summary was closed and the case was temporarily dismissed for the eighth time. In his ruling, the Prosecutor noted, "This Ministry is once again consulted on the dilemma of passively accepting that the Judge crashes against the Wall of Silence or asking their Honors to insist that obstacles are meant to be overcome; this requires an excess of investigative zeal that in times of legal normality, when the Judge was a Judge, his orders, heeded and respected, were an outstanding characteristic." It concluded by saying, "Whatever the result, the fate of this process is that it may not be able to have its essential element, the defendant, but we could, at least, give an undoubted feeling that the impossible has been done to provide the peace of mind of knowing the fate of the disappeared persons." The ruling was signed by Prosecutor Tomás Dahm Guíñez. On December 5, 1986, the San Miguel Court of Appeals revoked the resolution and ordered the reopening of the summary.

Subsequently, in March 1987, faced with a new temporary dismissal, Prosecutor Dahm expressed, "When examining the evidence added to this process, for this Ministry it is the feeling of a sad, long, dark, unfruitful night in search of the truth." Finally, he added, "Despite the 10 years of processing without positive results, of the three hundred and ninety-three pages, this Ministry is of the opinion that the effects of the temporary dismissal should be suspended, revoking the resolution under review" (March 6, 1987).

On August 28, 1988, the San Miguel Court of Appeals revoked the Judge's resolution and ordered, among other things, a new appearance before the Court by Marcelo Moren Brito.

At this stage of the process, on October 6, 1988, Brigadier Humberto Leiva Gutiérrez, National Vice Director of the C.N.I., reported that none of the affected individuals had political activities or pending arrest warrants.

On December 16 of the same year, Major General Enrique Morel Donoso made a second statement, via official letter, in which he reiterated his certainty that General Garay did not request any investigation related to disappeared persons.

Also, Major General Rolando Garay Cifuentes, in December 1988, testified once again via official letter, noting that between 1977 and 1980 he served as Intendant of Santiago and that, in that capacity, he was not related to situations involving detainees.

While the summons for Marcelo Moren Brito was pending—without the Court having been able to locate him—on August 9, 1989, the II Military Court of Santiago requested the inhibition of the 2nd Criminal Court of San Miguel to continue hearing the process.

Thus, the Ordinary Justice declared itself incompetent, and the case files were sent to the Military Justice, which placed them in the 2nd Prosecutor's Office, being consolidated with case file No. 553-78 (October 16, 1989), which had originated from a complaint filed by relatives of 70 forcibly disappeared persons against General Manuel Contreras Sepúlveda, Colonel Marcelo Moren Brito, and Lieutenant Colonel Rolf Gonzalo Wenderoth Pozo.

Without any proceedings being carried out regarding the disappearance of Nalvia Rosa Mena, the two Recabarren González brothers, and their father, Manuel Recabarren Rojas, and with no proceedings for four years, on November 20, 1989, Army Lieutenant Colonel Enrique Ibarra Chamorro, Military Prosecutor General, requested the application of the Amnesty Decree Law (D.L. 2.191) for this case, because the process had had the exclusive purpose of investigating alleged crimes that occurred during the period between September 11, 1973, and March 10, 1978, and because, during the 10 years of processing, it had not been possible to "determine the responsibility of any person." On November 30, 1989, the request was accepted by the 2nd Military Court, which permanently dismissed the case—which was still in the summary stage—because "the criminal responsibility of the persons allegedly accused of the reported facts was extinguished." The complaining parties appealed the resolution to the Martial Court, which confirmed the ruling in January 1992. A Complaint Appeal was then filed before the Supreme Court of Justice, which, as of December 1992, had not yet issued its resolution.

Source: (Complete background of the Complaint against Manuel Contreras Sepúlveda can be found in the file of Eduardo Alarcón Jara, July 30, 197)

The Supreme Court sentenced 14 agents of the dissolved National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) for their responsibility in the crimes of aggravated kidnapping of Luis Emilio Recabarren González, Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González, Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, Clara Elena Canteros Torres, Alejandro Rodríguez Urzúa, Daniel Palma Robledo, Carlos Enrique Godoy Lagarrigue, Iván Sergio Insunza Bascuñán, José Eduardo Santander Miranda, Mario Jesús Juica Vega, Víctor Hugo Morales Mazuela, Carlos Mario Vizcarra Cofré, Miguel Nazal Quiroz, Juan Aurelio Villarroel Zárate, and Julio Roberto Vega Vega; and the aggravated homicide of Eduardo Canteros Prado. The crimes were committed between April and August 1976, in the province of Santiago.

In a unanimous ruling (case file 71.900-2020), the Second Chamber of the high court—composed of justices Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Jorge Dahm, María Cristina Gajardo, María Soledad Melo, and Eliana Quezada—revoked the sentence issued by the Eighth Chamber of the Santiago Court of Appeals in April 2020, which had applied the "half-prescription" (partial statute of limitations) to the accused.

In a replacement sentence, the Supreme Court sentenced former DINA leaders and former Army officers Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo and Jorge Claudio Andrade Gómez to 15 years and one day in prison as authors of 16 counts of aggravated kidnapping, and 10 years and one day as authors of one count of aggravated homicide.

Meanwhile, Rolf Arnold Wenderoth Pozo was sentenced to two terms of 10 years and one day in prison as the author of three aggravated kidnappings and one aggravated homicide; Juan Hernán Morales Salgado and Gladys de las Mercedes Calderón Carreño were sentenced to 10 years and one day in prison as authors of six aggravated kidnappings.

In the case of former agents Sergio Orlando Escalona Acuña, Juvenal Alfonso Piña Garrido, Jorge Iván Díaz Radulovich, and Gustavo Enrique Guerrero Aguilera, a sentence of 5 years and one day in prison was applied as authors of a single case of aggravated kidnapping.

Likewise, former agents Orlando Jesús Torrejón Gatica, Claudio Enrique Pacheco Fernández, Orlando del Tránsito Altamirano Sanhueza, and Carlos Eugenio López Inostroza must serve 7 years as accomplices to the 16 aggravated kidnappings and 5 years and one day in prison as accomplices to the aggravated homicide.

Finally, Hermon Helec Alfaro Mundaca must serve 7 years as an accomplice to 15 aggravated kidnappings and 5 years and one day in prison as an accomplice to the aggravated homicide.

The criminals Carlos José Leonardo López Tapia and Ricardo Víctor Lawrence Mires, who had been sentenced in the first-instance ruling issued by Judge Leopoldo Llanos in July 2017 to 20-year prison terms, passed away during the course of the proceedings.

Also deceased are those convicted in the first instance: Ciro Ernesto Torré Sáez, Orlando José Manzo Durán, and Pedro Segundo Bitterlich Jaramillo.

In dismissing the "half-prescription," the Supreme Court establishes that: "(...) it is necessary to take into consideration that the matter under discussion must also be analyzed in accordance with international Human Rights regulations contained primarily in the Geneva Conventions, which prevent prescription, whether total or gradual, regarding crimes committed in cases of non-international armed conflicts."

The resolution adds that: "The same conclusion is reached by considering both the norms of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons and those of the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, since, in accordance with those regulations, gradual prescription has the same nature as total prescription."

"From another perspective, legal doctrine on this matter has expressed that its foundations are found in the same considerations of social stability and legal certainty that gave rise to Article 93 of the Penal Code, but that it is intended to produce its effects in those cases where the realization of the ends provided for prescription does not occur naturally but rather at the end of a gradual process—that is, when the time necessary to prescribe is about to be fulfilled, which would justify the mitigation of the sentence," it adds.

"However—it continues—it is evident that this conclusion applies to cases that do not present the characteristics of crimes against humanity, as these are imprescriptible. Consequently, for such mitigation to be appropriate, it is necessary that it be a crime in the process of being prescribed, which is not the case here, so the passage of time produces no effect, because social reproach does not diminish with time, which only occurs in cases of common crimes."

The Facts

In the first-instance ruling, presiding judge Leopoldo Llanos Sagristá established that, within the framework of the systematic repression of opponents of the military regime, between the months of April and August 1976, a series of arrests of individuals took place, all of whom were members of the Communist Party.

On April 29, 1976, in the area of Santa Rosa and Sebastopol streets in the San Miguel commune, the brothers Manuel Guillermo, 22, and Luis Emilio Recabarren González, 29, were arrested by DINA agents, along with Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, 20, and her two-year-old son. The child was abandoned near their home during the night.

The following day, April 30, at 7:00 a.m., Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, 50, was arrested shortly after leaving his home in the same area as he was preparing to board a public bus.

All of the detainees were taken to the clandestine detention and torture center 'Villa Grimaldi'; Manuel Guillermo Recabarren González and Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas were also seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' facility, and Luis Emilio Recabarren González at 'Cuatro Álamos'. From those facilities, the DINA forcibly disappeared them.

On July 23, 1976, around 8:00 p.m., at the intersection of Rojas Magallanes and Panamá streets in the La Florida commune, the young Clara Elena Canteros Torres, 21, was arrested by DINA agents. She was subdued while getting off public transport.

She was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi' where she was seen by witnesses, and on August 20, 1976, she was removed from that facility along with fellow detainees Mario Juica Vega and Óscar Ramos. Since then, they have been forcibly disappeared.

At 9:40 p.m., Eduardo Canteros Prado, 48, Clara Elena's uncle and a civil engineer, was arrested on the public road by DINA agents in front of his home located on Panamá street, in the La Florida commune. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'. In 1990, his remains were found at the Las Tórtolas estate in Colina, a facility that belonged to the Army until 1980.

On July 27, 1976, around 5:15 p.m., Alejandro Rodríguez Urzúa, 49, was arrested by DINA agents from his office located at Mallinkrodt 70, Barrio Bellavista. They took him to the 'Villa Grimaldi' facility.

On August 4, 1976, Daniel Palma Robledo, 61, a businessman, was arrested in the morning on Avenida Matta, between San Diego and Arturo Prat streets; after picking up his mail, he bought a newspaper and, as he was leaving, he was arrested and taken to an unknown destination, but he was later seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' extermination center.

On that same August 4, at 3:00 p.m., the physician Carlos Enrique Godoy Lagarrigue, 39, was arrested. They seized him during his commute between the San Parochial Hospital of San Bernardo and his private practice, located at the corner of Barros Arana and Arturo Prat streets. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi' and, subsequently, to 'Cuatro Álamos', from where he was forcibly disappeared.

During the night of August 4, the surgeon Iván Sergio Insunza Bascuñán, 43, was arrested by DINA agents while driving his vehicle. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi' and then to 'Cuatro Álamos'.

On August 6, 1976, shortly after leaving his home, around 9:30 a.m., the student leader and member of the Central Única de Trabajadores, José Eduardo Santander Miranda, 29, was arrested by DINA agents; surviving witnesses saw him at the 'Villa Grimaldi' facility.

On August 9, Víctor Hugo Morales Mazuela, 45, a carpenter and construction worker, union leader, and regional organizer for the Communist Party, was arrested in the morning in the vicinity of the 'Villa México' neighborhood in the Maipú commune and was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'. Subsequently, he was seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' barracks.

On that same August 9, Mario Jesús Juica Vega, 34, a merchant, was arrested around noon in the vicinity of Plaza Egaña, in the Ñuñoa commune, and taken to 'Villa Grimaldi', a place where he was seen by numerous witnesses. On August 20, he was removed from that facility along with two other detainees, and since then, the DINA has kept them forcibly disappeared.

On August 11, 1976, at 9:00 a.m., while leaving his home located on Chiloé street, between Santa Rosa and Gran Avenida, in the San Miguel commune, the merchant Miguel Nazal Quiroz, 44, was arrested by DINA agents. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'.

During the night of that same August 11, Carlos Mario Vizcarra Cofré, 31, a body shop worker, was arrested at his home in Quinta Normal by agents who took him to 'Villa Grimaldi', a facility where witnesses saw him until August 25 of that same year. Subsequently, he was seen at the 'Simón Bolívar' facility.

On August 13, Juan Aurelio Villarroel Zárate, 55, a union leader and photoengraver, was arrested around noon by DINA agents near the Mapocho Station while traveling from his home in Conchalí. He was taken to 'Villa Grimaldi'.

On August 16, 1976, at 11:30 a.m., the worker Julio Roberto Vega Vega was arrested by DINA agents on Avenida Presidente Balmaceda, between Cueto and Libertad, in the Santiago commune. Several witnesses saw him held both at 'Villa Grimaldi' and at the 'Simón Bolívar' barracks.

by Darío Núñez

Source: resumen.cl, July 30, 2023

Date: 07-30-2023

Santiago Court confirms payment of compensation for the detention and disappearance of the plaintiff's father, brothers, and sister-in-law

In a unanimous ruling, the First Chamber of the appellate court confirmed the sentence ordering the State to pay $80,000,000 in compensation for the disappearance of the plaintiff's father, brothers, and sister-in-law, who were arrested by DINA agents in late April 1976, in the area of Santa Rosa and Sebastopol streets.

The Santiago Court of Appeals confirmed the sentence ordering the State to pay $80,000,000 (eighty million pesos) in compensation for the disappearance of the plaintiff's father, brothers, and sister-in-law, who were arrested by DINA agents in late April 1976, in the area of Santa Rosa and Sebastopol streets.

In a unanimous ruling (case file 8.041-2021), the First Chamber of the appellate court—composed of justices Marisol Rojas, Inelie Durán, and María Paula Merino—confirmed in all its parts the challenged sentence, which had accepted the claim.

"Given the merit of the records, the consulted sentence of May 27, 2020, issued by the Seventeenth Civil Court of Santiago, in case file C-30503-2019, is approved," the ruling states.

The ratified first-instance sentence established that: "(...) in relation to the first premise, that is, the existence of an unlawful act, in accordance with the nature of the matter and facts upon which the litigation turns, from the merit of the evidence mentioned in the previous grounds, and the testimony provided by the plaintiff, it is legally proven in the case file that both the father, as well as two of the brothers and a sister-in-law of the plaintiff, were arrested without legal cause and illegally by State agents, taken to illegal detention and torture centers, without details being known of their stay in said facilities or their subsequent transfer or whereabouts, remaining disappeared to this date."

"That the described conduct accounts unfailingly for the commission of illegal and arbitrary acts, which affect the most essential aspects of human beings, such as life, liberty, and dignity, and which, due to their extent and scope, transcend the individual himself, affecting all of humanity, and therefore fall within the concept of a crime against humanity," it added.

"That, in effect, it is stated in all the documentation offered, which provides irrefutable proof of the forced disappearance and subsequent stay of the plaintiff's relatives in the torture centers known as 'Villa Grimaldi', 'Simón Bolívar', and 'Cuatro Álamos', circumstances and background information that allow this judge to consider the existence of the unlawful acts invoked proven in the terms set forth in ground 13°," it concluded.

Therefore, it resolved

"I.- That the claim dated October 12, 2019, is accepted, insofar as it is declared that the defendant is civilly liable for the acts of which Mr. Juan Francisco Recabarren Durán was a victim by rebound, consisting of the detention and disappearance of his father Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, his brothers Luis Emilio and Manuel Guillermo, both Recabarren González, and his sister-in-law Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, which occurred between April and August 1976, and the State is ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of $80,000,000 (eighty million pesos) as compensation for moral damages;

II.- That the sum ordered to be paid shall accrue adjustments and interest from the time this ruling becomes final and until its effective payment."

Source: pjud.cl 3/8/2022

Date: 03-08-2022

Civil Court orders the State to pay compensation for the disappearance of a family group.

The Court accepted the claim for compensation for moral damages, after establishing that the detention and disappearance of Juan Francisco Recabarren Durán's relatives constitutes a crime against humanity.

The Seventeenth Civil Court of Santiago ordered the State to pay a total compensation of $80,000,000 to the plaintiff for the disappearance of his father, two brothers, and a sister-in-law, who were arrested by DINA agents in April 1976.

The sentence indicates that the described conduct accounts unfailingly for the commission of illegal and arbitrary acts, which affect the most essential aspects of human beings, such as life, liberty, and dignity, and which, due to their extent and scope, transcend the individual himself, affecting all of humanity, and therefore fall within the concept of a crime against humanity.

It adds that, subsequently, despite it being a fact not contested by the fiscal defense, this judge deems it appropriate to certify the filial relationship—of father, brother, and sister-in-law—existing between the forcibly disappeared persons and the aforementioned plaintiff, in special consideration of the moral damages alleged by reason of the family bond existing between them, a bond that is considered proven thanks to the birth and marriage certificates provided.

For the Court, in this instance, the damages suffered by the plaintiff refer to moral damage in its broadest conception, which includes both physical or emotional pain or suffering such as that alleged by him, as well as—according to doctrinal development—the loss of pleasure or enjoyment and even opportunity, as can be inferred from the account that flows from the testimony provided in the case file, where the three witnesses presented by the plaintiff were consistent in asserting and describing the suffering endured by Mr.

Juan Francisco Recabarren Durán, who at the date of the events was 18 years old, suffering that extended over the years due to not knowing the whereabouts and final destination of his father, brothers, and sister-in-law, which of course account for the causal link between the proven criminal acts and the damage suffered by the family of the forcibly disappeared person, since if the former had not occurred, the latter would never have been produced.

That in effect—it continues—the sequelae of the original illicit act consisting of the forced disappearance of his father and relatives appear as a direct, natural, and logical consequence of what was experienced by a close relative: illegal detention, physical and psychological torture, and forced disappearance, all facts that undoubtedly affect the life of any person to a great extent, causing, among other things, obstacles to family and social emotional stability, circumstances proven by the background information taken into view, in particular the social reports included in the electronic file, the text of the aforementioned sentences, and the alluded testimony.

Therefore, it is resolved

«That the claim dated October 12, 2019, is accepted, insofar as it is declared that the defendant is civilly liable for the acts of which Mr. Juan Francisco Recabarren Durán was a victim by rebound, consisting of the detention and disappearance of his father Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, his brothers Luis Emilio and Manuel Guillermo, both Recabarren González, and his sister-in-law Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado, which occurred between April and August 1976, and the State is ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of $80,000,000 (eighty million pesos) as compensation for moral damages».

Source: diarioconstitucional.cl 6/8/2020

Date: 06-08-2020

ANA GONZÁLEZ: "WE MUST SEARCH SO AS NOT TO LOSE HOPE"

Her image is the symbol of the persistence of memory in our country. Her grief, endless and unfathomable, is the banner of struggle she has led, representing in her own body the history of the victims of human rights abuses during the dictatorship.

Ana González de Recabarren recalls her childhood in Tocopilla, her arrival in Santiago, the Communist Youth, and the first images of her love, Manuel. A testimony that is also contained in the pages of her autobiography, which she has just finished.

The strength of her face in a newly inaugurated mural, the same one seen in every march for justice, truth, and memory. An insurgent woman, a woman of a special guerrilla movement that she never even imagined when the 20th century had not yet reached its halfway point, back there in Tocopilla, in the north of Chile.

Ana González (1925), a historic leader of the Association of Relatives of the Forcibly Disappeared and a communist since her adolescence, observes the faces of her loved ones, “my own,” while checking the rings on her slender hands, with impeccable red nails.

She does so to begin remembering, long before that fateful day when infamy broke a Chile that has not managed to return to its democratic, republican density; a Chile that has not managed to recover its lives.

Manuel Guillermo (22), married, two children, plumber; Luis Emilio (29), graphic technician, former union leader, and his wife, Nalvia Rosa Mena (20), three months pregnant, housewife, and their two-and-a-half-year-old son, Luis Emilio Recabarren Mena, "Puntito," were kidnapped by the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) in an operation that agents set up near their family home, at the corner of Sebastopol and Santa Rosa streets.

The Recabarren González brothers owned a print shop at Nataniel 47. They followed the trade of their father, Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas, who went out to look for them very early the next day. He did not return either.

They say he was seen at Villa Grimaldi. His trail was lost in August of that year. Puntito, the grandson whom the State agents left at the mercy of the persecuted street, was the only one who survived.

They took them all.

The Recabarren González house, in San Joaquín, is part of that lost country. The gate was locked a few days after Manuel never returned; he had been a trade union leader for graphic workers, president of the unions at Editorial Universitaria and Editorial Nascimento, and president of the Supply and Price Control Boards (JAP) of San Miguel.

Everyone, including Ana, never stopped being militants of the Communist Party. Ana, a grassroots leader and president of the neighborhood council, lived to organize and find ways to tear down social inequalities.

After that April 30th, there was nothing left but the silence from outside, from the distrustful street, in front of that gate that remains closed with a large chain. It was closed that way because the sound of the latch made Ana tremble daily with a false noise, the same noise that eternalized the dictatorship.

A door that will only open when they return.

A SEA FROM TOCOPILLA TO SANTIAGO

Her house in San Joaquín is low and flanked by a wintry tree covered in plastic flowers, small, like in the south. It is a house wide open on the inside, because her daughter Patricia decided to return from Argentina to open it to those who want to hear about the tragedy and about that haughty nobility that means “to struggle with joy.”

Sting, Joan Manuel Serrat, Gladys Marín, “la Tencha,” José Miguel Varas (“we used to go out to lunch with him and his wife, Iris Largo; I loved him very much”), and so many others are placed on the walls like timeless images, clinging to this house that refuses to be the past.

It refuses because to deny it is to deny Chile. It refuses because there is a book waiting to be published. The memoirs of Ana González no longer keep their author awake. They are there, ready to be published, woven one after another; poetic, torn, firm as threads recovered from the 20th and 21st centuries.

Here, the history of a country of cracks and thunderclaps unfolds, and it also draws—like someone following the dots of a sketch—a country of infinite tenderness that today is sometimes hard to imagine.

“I was born in the north, in Toco, and then my parents sold there and bought two houses in Tocopilla; and I think they bought on the best street because on one side of the block it was all ‘family people,’ as they call it, and across the street nothing but prostitutes.

So I grew up playing with their children. Besides, when my brothers were about 18, and since my mom had a business, they would cross over to bring them wine or beer, and I, without my mom knowing, would go right behind them; I never, ever saw a bad example,” she remembers and laughs while acknowledging that those years of innocence were full of games, affection, and the crossing of social classes, dialoguing; hard years, too.

Years of few photographs, and she is one of those who has a few, with her parents.

“I quit smoking many years ago. One day I said, ‘If I want to live and keep fighting for my own and stay in this country, I have to quit smoking,’ and overnight I quit and never smoked again. Do you know when I get the urge?

When I go to a human rights assembly and people go out to smoke, I go out and ask them for one to take a little puff; and that’s what I do, nothing more,” she says, portrayed a thousand times with her hair tied back and her cigarette in her hand, dodging the anxiety covered by decades of waiting.

When there is a demonstration or activity related to human rights and the weather is good, Ana leaves her house and Patricia takes her. September of this year was heavy, cold, and spiraling: with a minister who didn't last a week, a massive revolt for living memory, and generalized indignation in the face of denialism.

Ana went out little during September, but she read, listened, and saw a lot. Her struggle, which belongs to so many, warrants it. Today she laughs out of the corner of her eye when she looks back on her northern childhood: “With my sister Olga, we did all the ‘mischief’; we played marbles, ‘caballito de bronce’; it was a very beautiful time.

And my mom liked to hoist the flag while playing the Victrola, those cabinet ones, with the anthem. As the anthem progressed, she would hoist the flag together with all the young people in the neighborhood.

During those years, an aunt who lived in Santiago—on my father's side, the family is from Rancagua; even his socialist brothers were councilman and mayor—went north to meet us. I was in the sixth grade, so my aunt decided to talk to my mom to let me go with her to Santiago so I could continue my humanities studies; back then there weren't any in the north.

And I came by boat with her,” she recalls.

That boat trip marked that era. As if looking over an ancient figurehead, she closes her eyes and says she can even feel how it moves slowly, as if her bed were sailing from Tocopilla, where her father, like thousands of men at the beginning of the last century, was looking for gold—he was a laborer—and found Ana’s mother, a widow with six children (“they were the Vargas”).

They had two more and a life of hard work and afternoons in the sun. “The most beautiful days were those when we all played ‘chaya’; we threw water at each other and said ‘chayaaa!’ The street was the patio and they even brought out the washbasins; the adults, everyone, we played.

They would climb onto the roofs and from there you could hear ‘chayaaa!’ and they would throw water while we were having lunch; at night it continued in the plaza. It’s as if I could see it. That game has been lost, even the paper ‘chaya’ is rarely seen.” Those were times of open houses and streets, block after block.

Ana, already in Santiago, studied at the high school and helped her aunt Ana González de Peñaloza. “She was a wonderful woman; I haven't seen another like her. She sewed custom-made pants; work that she then sent to the tailor shops downtown.

She had five sewing machines and the operators who did the hemming; everything in her house. Playing, at thirteen I already knew how to make pants. They would light the brazier to have coal for the irons.” That is where her life in the capital began.

MANUEL

“I was about 16, and in the Bulnes neighborhood—where I lived with my aunt and uncle, on the way to Valparaíso—there was a Communist Party headquarters. What did I know about politics at that time, but there in that very modest headquarters, they held dances every Saturday; a lot of people went, there was never a scandal, nothing.

My aunt gave me permission to go. I didn't do anything so as not to disregard the advice my aunt gave me.

At that time in my house, there was a large window that faced the street. A young man used to pass by who looked so proper. That was Manuel, Manuel Recabarren. At that time he had only reached the beginning of the primer, but he was so intelligent, so determined.

As an adult, he learned to read.” One day, while they were announcing ‘reserved with pastries!’ and the dance continued, Ana and Manuel met. “At those dances, I learned to know the young communists, they were perfect, and there was Manuel, the boy I saw pass by every day from my window when he came from work.

He was very good; at 16 he mastered all the politics of Chile and foreign countries, having come from a family without resources. At eight years old, he was already going to the river to pull out stones for construction.

He lived near Renca, on the edge of the river; he also shined shoes. But Manuel, over time, came to work in print shops. I recommended him to my friends. But he didn't pay attention to them. That’s when I said ‘he is faithful,’ faithful to the affection he had for me; one knows when a young man falls in love with one.

We had never talked, but I admired him. That’s when I joined the JJCC and then I invited Manuel to the ‘Jota’ so he would go to the meetings, since he knew so much; that way it was easier to talk to the girlfriend he wanted and I admired him,” Ana recalls. “The first time they invited me to the Jota there were about fifteen young people and it caught my attention to see how organized they were.

They elected a president, a secretary, someone for finances. They were very different from the young people one knew. They were very respectful.

Manuel won me over with his beautiful attitude. I only ever dated Manuel.”

Ana was captivated by his intelligence and tenacity. “I started falling in love with him, because I saw him as very serious, too serious.” We had a workshop with my aunt, at Santo Domingo 1240. In that colonial house, with three patios, a painter also had a workshop, and in the middle, the union leaders of bars, soda fountains, and restaurants would meet.

It would fill up on the day of the meetings,” she recalls of those first days living together in that kind of community, in a room of an old mansion. “My aunt let us live together; she was very human.

He worked at El Siglo later on. He only reached the second year of school, but later he gave lectures at universities; he was rigorous with his training, he had a responsibility to the party. We had a line: organize people, give talks, go out to paint in the streets for the elections, in brigades; we made the paste in kerosene cans to stick up propaganda.

In those times, the youth went out to do propaganda, now they don't; today are other times, other ways. It was a beautiful time, of much unity and joy. With Manuel, we had six children… I get emotional when I talk about Manuel.”

“FOR THE PEOPLE”

“Capitalists do not put capital at the service of young people, so that young people can improve themselves. They only exploit them more to pay them less,” says Ana with the conviction that characterizes her.

The same one that made her always vote for Salvador Allende, whom she met at the wedding of Francia Palestro, in a large house with wide patios. “We were invited by my neighbors, socialist militants, with whom we always got along well, even though there was discord between the parties.

Allende arrived at that wedding. Imagine what that was like. We organized a line to greet the newly inaugurated president. We were in that when I realize that Allende greets and greets, but perhaps because he had so many leaders behind him talking to him, he was no longer looking at who was in front of him.

Well, in that, my turn comes and he shakes my hand, but he was looking behind him, so I don't give him mine. Then, he feels that he isn't being shaken back and he turns around and that’s when he looked at me. That’s when I look at him and say, ‘You know, Mr. President, when I shake hands, I like to be looked in the eyes.’ And that’s how it was,” she recalls.

Then came the coup d’état, that day when everything fell apart, because “he had no support when he was president; he was left very alone, only the communists responded to him. It was very hard that day and the ones that followed.” Ana never wanted to leave Chile, they didn't want to.

Hours before her own tragedy broke out, on April 29, 1976, Ana was making a flyer to distribute for May Day. “Gosh, you write beautifully, Manuel told me,” she recalls now about one of the last phrases that sometimes flash in the memories of terror in those years, before giving way to the void and the struggle, without Manuel, without two of her children, without one of her daughters-in-law, and without the grandson she was expecting.

“One day I entered the port of memories, I opened the dusty and old trunk, between amazed and astonished, like mist in the sky, I saw how pages and pages flew (…). That is how I gave birth to this book which is more or less life itself,” Ana reads while reviewing fragments of the hundreds of pages she wrote by hand over the years.

She says she still has “thread for a while,” while she observes the portrait of Manuel in front of her bed, that of her disappeared children.

“I grew old, my old man didn't; my loved ones didn't grow old, only I grew old.”

The book, she emphasizes, “is for the people, because stubbornly I continue living; I am a woman captive by the love for her people,” and she will continue to be so as long as she seeks a more human Chile and finds her own, because “you have to search so as not to lose hope, even if it is among ourselves, among simple encounters” like those from the times of the chaya.

“I see today—she warns—that the popular parties have lost, but there will always be committed people and new ways of struggle, bringing people together; one must not forget that the parties of the bourgeoisie will never be on the left. That is why I believe that Allende was very ahead of his time; there was not enough time.”

On January 28, 2004, Ana wrote “Letter from Ana González to Juan Emilio Cheyre,” to whom she said: “I suffer for the magical and dreamy 21 years of my daughter-in-law Nalvia, three months pregnant, for my children Luis Emilio and Mañungo, and for my husband Manuel.

All of them were detained and hidden in the depths of the earth. But I do not suffer only for my pain of absence, I die a little each day thinking about what my loved ones suffered, in the most complete defenselessness (…).

I appeal to your military honor, to your conscience, to your love for the institution. The stubborn facts lead you to a single path: impunity cannot be the epilogue of this national tragedy. Only then, only then, will there be a ‘never again,’ as you and I wish…”.

Ana waits for good winds for October while looking at an image of the mural that Coas Chile has just dedicated to her, a few days after the Supreme Court granted parole to prisoners in Punta Peuco. And Ana, who will not open that gate until the day the truth is known and justice is reached, does not wait alone.

Source: lanacion.cl 26/10/2018

Date: 26-10-2018

At 93, Ana González de Recabarren has left us

The emblematic neighbor of our commune, a bastion of Human Rights, passed away this morning; the distinguished neighbor lived in Cantares de Chile in San Joaquín.

During the morning of this Friday, the historic human rights leader Ana González de Recabarren passed away at 93. The woman became a symbol of the struggle against the ferocity of the dictatorship and impunity, after losing her husband, her two children, and her pregnant daughter-in-law at the hands of Pinochet's secret police. She never stopped seeking truth and justice.

BIOGRAPHY

She was born in Toco, a nitrate office near Tocopilla, in 1925. In the 1930s, she moved with her family to live in the latter city. Subsequently, she moved to live in the Bulnes neighborhood in Renca, Santiago. She married Manuel Segundo Recabarren Rojas.

She became a militant of the Communist Party at 17, and ceased her militancy around the year 2000.

In December 2016, Ana was admitted to the San José Hospital for respiratory failure. Since then, her health declined considerably. On February 10, 2017, at 91, the musician Ana Tijoux and her band gave her an intimate concert, in which they performed the song “Sacar la voz.”

In the first years of the military dictatorship, she lost a large part of her family at the hands of the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA). Two of her children, Luis Emilio (29) and Manuel “Mañungo” Guillermo Recabarren (22), and the spouse of the former, Nalvia Rosa Mena Alvarado (20)—who was pregnant—were forcibly disappeared on April 29, 1976.

Only her grandson Luis Emilio “Porotito” Recabarren Mena, then 2 years old, returned alive. The next day, April 30, her husband Manuel (50) went out to look for his children and his daughter-in-law, and was also forcibly disappeared. According to some testimonies, he was seen alive at the Villa Grimaldi detention center.

After the disappearance of her relatives, she joined the Association of Relatives of the Forcibly Disappeared (AFDD), becoming one of its main leaders, along with Sola Sierra, Mireya García, Viviana Díaz, and Clotario Blest.

She participated in a hunger strike at the headquarters of the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC) and was a representative of the AFDD along with Gabriela Bravo and Ulda Ortiz in various international institutions such as the United Nations, the Organization of American States, the International Red Cross, the International Commission of Jurists, the Holy See, Amnesty International, among others.

She was the protagonist of a documentary filmed in 1996, Quiero llorar a mares, which was broadcast in 2000 as a chapter of El mirador (Televisión Nacional de Chile), and which the following year won an Ondas Award in the Ibero-American category of “Best television program, professional or station.” In June 2000, she filed a lawsuit for the disappearance of her four relatives against Augusto Pinochet.

In 2011, she was nominated for the National Human Rights Award of Chile, which ultimately went to Viviana Díaz. González and Andrés Aylwin were honored at an event of the Nueva Mayoría parties held on September 9, 2013, for their struggle in defense of the victims of human rights violations during the Pinochet regime.

Source: radiosanjoaquin.cl 26/10/2018

Date: 26-10-2018