Prosecuting Pinochet: International crimes in Spanish domestic law

Human Rights Quarterly

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 927-979

  Wilson, Richard J ^a,b,c,d,e  

^a Department of Law ^*  (United States)

^b Clinical Programs   (United States)

^c AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d DAITO BUNKA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^e PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DEL PERÚ   (Peru)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0011842919     PISSN: 02750392     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/hrq.1999.0056     Document Type: Article

References (273)

1. This paper emerges from more than two years of collaboration between the International Human Rights Law Clinic at American University's Washington College of Law, of which the author is the Director, and the team of Spanish lawyers and activists working on the two cases bringing criminal charges against the military leaders in Chile and Argentina during the 1970s and 1980s, now consolidated, discussed herein. Students in the Clinic have provided legal research, primarily on international human rights and humanitarian law issues, to that team since the time the author first met with Gregorio Dionis and Isabelo Herreros, of Izquierda Unida, in Santiago, Chile in December 1996, and later with Juan E. Garces, in Madrid, in March 1997. It has been an honor to be a part of the team bringing these actions, and to have such open, dedicated, and adept collaboration in Spain. On this side of the Atlantic, inestimable assistance has been given by Margarita Lacabe, Executive Director of Derechos Human Rights and coordinator of the Derechos Human Rights website in which so many full-text court documents and analyses of the cases are found. Her husband, Mike Katz-Lacabe, has also been an invaluable source of information by regularly circulating press clippings from the Spanish, Argentine, and Chilean press. I would also like to express my appreciation for the helpful suggestions, after reviewing early drafts of this article, from my faculty colleagues Diane Orentlicher and Michael Tigar. The Spanish translations are by the author and are by no means official, unless otherwise stated. Caution should be exercised in reliance on English-language translations of Spanish-language documents. Any errors of translation are, of course, solely the author's.
2. In re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] All E.R. (D) 629 (Q.B. Div'l Ct. 1998), at ¶ 57 (quoting Ampliación y fundamentación del Auto ordenando la prisión provisional incondicional de AUGUSTO PINOCHET y su detención [Amplification and Foundation for an Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusta Pinochet and His Detention], Madrid, 18 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Second Arrest Order]). Two arrest warrants were issued by London Metropolitan Magistrates for Pinochet's arrest in England, both at the request of Investigating Magistrate Baltasar Garzón, sitting in the Audiencia Nacional of Spain in Madrid. The first, to interview General Pinochet as a material witness in the Spanish proceedings, was issued on 16 October 1998. The second, for his provisional arrest for the crimes described above, was issued on 22 October 1998. The excerpt above comes from the request for the second arrest warrant, apparently translated from the original Spanish, which is set out in paragraph 57 of the opinion of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division, issued on 28 October 1998. The Court held that General Pinochet enjoyed immunity from arrest or extradition based on his status as a former head of state, subject to review by the House of Lords. The Divisional Court's opinion was part of protracted appellate proceedings in England dealing primarily with the issue of General Pinochet's immunity as a former head of state. The British proceedings garnered international attention and will not be reiterated here, except by reference. The full text of the Divisional Court's opinion can be found on the Internet at (visited 17 June 1999). The decision of the Divisional Court was reversed by a 3-2 decision of the House of Lords in Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] 4 All E.R. 897 (H.L. 1998), available on (visited on 17 June 1999). This decision of the House of Lords, in turn, was vacated when one of the Lords was found to have a conflict of interest. See Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2), [1999] 1 All E.R. 577 (H.L. 1999). The Lords' second decision, rendered by a seven-member panel on 24 March 1999, again concluded, this time by a margin of 6-1, that the General did not enjoy head-of-state immunity from prosecution and was thus subject to extradition to Spain. However, because of its interpretation of England's obligations under domestic legislation on torture adopted pursuant to the Convention Against Torture, the Court limited the scope of the extradition inquiry to alleged crimes of torture and conspiracy to commit torture occurring after 8 December 1988. Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), [1999] 2 All E.R. 97, 98, 115 (H.L. 1999) [hereinafter Pinochet (No. 3)]. A decision by British Home Secretary Jack Straw permitted the case to proceed into extradition. Letter from Jack Straw about the Extradition of Pinochet, 15 April 1999, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Although appealed by Pinochet's lawyers, Straw's decision was upheld, clearing the way, as of this writing, for the extradition process to begin. See Clare Dyer, Pinochet Fails in Latest Bid to Fight Off Extradition, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 28 May 1999.
3. In re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] All E.R. (D) 629 (Q.B. Div'l Ct. 1998), at ¶ 57 (quoting Ampliación y fundamentación del Auto ordenando la prisión provisional incondicional de AUGUSTO PINOCHET y su detención [Amplification and Foundation for an Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusta Pinochet and His Detention], Madrid, 18 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Second Arrest Order]). Two arrest warrants were issued by London Metropolitan Magistrates for Pinochet's arrest in England, both at the request of Investigating Magistrate Baltasar Garzón, sitting in the Audiencia Nacional of Spain in Madrid. The first, to interview General Pinochet as a material witness in the Spanish proceedings, was issued on 16 October 1998. The second, for his provisional arrest for the crimes described above, was issued on 22 October 1998. The excerpt above comes from the request for the second arrest warrant, apparently translated from the original Spanish, which is set out in paragraph 57 of the opinion of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division, issued on 28 October 1998. The Court held that General Pinochet enjoyed immunity from arrest or extradition based on his status as a former head of state, subject to review by the House of Lords. The Divisional Court's opinion was part of protracted appellate proceedings in England dealing primarily with the issue of General Pinochet's immunity as a former head of state. The British proceedings garnered international attention and will not be reiterated here, except by reference. The full text of the Divisional Court's opinion can be found on the Internet at (visited 17 June 1999). The decision of the Divisional Court was reversed by a 3-2 decision of the House of Lords in Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] 4 All E.R. 897 (H.L. 1998), available on (visited on 17 June 1999). This decision of the House of Lords, in turn, was vacated when one of the Lords was found to have a conflict of interest. See Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2), [1999] 1 All E.R. 577 (H.L. 1999). The Lords' second decision, rendered by a seven-member panel on 24 March 1999, again concluded, this time by a margin of 6-1, that the General did not enjoy head-of-state immunity from prosecution and was thus subject to extradition to Spain. However, because of its interpretation of England's obligations under domestic legislation on torture adopted pursuant to the Convention Against Torture, the Court limited the scope of the extradition inquiry to alleged crimes of torture and conspiracy to commit torture occurring after 8 December 1988. Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), [1999] 2 All E.R. 97, 98, 115 (H.L. 1999) [hereinafter Pinochet (No. 3)]. A decision by British Home Secretary Jack Straw permitted the case to proceed into extradition. Letter from Jack Straw about the Extradition of Pinochet, 15 April 1999, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Although appealed by Pinochet's lawyers, Straw's decision was upheld, clearing the way, as of this writing, for the extradition process to begin. See Clare Dyer, Pinochet Fails in Latest Bid to Fight Off Extradition, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 28 May 1999.
4. In re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] All E.R. (D) 629 (Q.B. Div'l Ct. 1998), at ¶ 57 (quoting Ampliación y fundamentación del Auto ordenando la prisión provisional incondicional de AUGUSTO PINOCHET y su detención [Amplification and Foundation for an Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusta Pinochet and His Detention], Madrid, 18 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Second Arrest Order]). Two arrest warrants were issued by London Metropolitan Magistrates for Pinochet's arrest in England, both at the request of Investigating Magistrate Baltasar Garzón, sitting in the Audiencia Nacional of Spain in Madrid. The first, to interview General Pinochet as a material witness in the Spanish proceedings, was issued on 16 October 1998. The second, for his provisional arrest for the crimes described above, was issued on 22 October 1998. The excerpt above comes from the request for the second arrest warrant, apparently translated from the original Spanish, which is set out in paragraph 57 of the opinion of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division, issued on 28 October 1998. The Court held that General Pinochet enjoyed immunity from arrest or extradition based on his status as a former head of state, subject to review by the House of Lords. The Divisional Court's opinion was part of protracted appellate proceedings in England dealing primarily with the issue of General Pinochet's immunity as a former head of state. The British proceedings garnered international attention and will not be reiterated here, except by reference. The full text of the Divisional Court's opinion can be found on the Internet at (visited 17 June 1999). The decision of the Divisional Court was reversed by a 3-2 decision of the House of Lords in Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] 4 All E.R. 897 (H.L. 1998), available on (visited on 17 June 1999). This decision of the House of Lords, in turn, was vacated when one of the Lords was found to have a conflict of interest. See Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2), [1999] 1 All E.R. 577 (H.L. 1999). The Lords' second decision, rendered by a seven-member panel on 24 March 1999, again concluded, this time by a margin of 6-1, that the General did not enjoy head-of-state immunity from prosecution and was thus subject to extradition to Spain. However, because of its interpretation of England's obligations under domestic legislation on torture adopted pursuant to the Convention Against Torture, the Court limited the scope of the extradition inquiry to alleged crimes of torture and conspiracy to commit torture occurring after 8 December 1988. Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), [1999] 2 All E.R. 97, 98, 115 (H.L. 1999) [hereinafter Pinochet (No. 3)]. A decision by British Home Secretary Jack Straw permitted the case to proceed into extradition. Letter from Jack Straw about the Extradition of Pinochet, 15 April 1999, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Although appealed by Pinochet's lawyers, Straw's decision was upheld, clearing the way, as of this writing, for the extradition process to begin. See Clare Dyer, Pinochet Fails in Latest Bid to Fight Off Extradition, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 28 May 1999.
5. In re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] All E.R. (D) 629 (Q.B. Div'l Ct. 1998), at ¶ 57 (quoting Ampliación y fundamentación del Auto ordenando la prisión provisional incondicional de AUGUSTO PINOCHET y su detención [Amplification and Foundation for an Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusta Pinochet and His Detention], Madrid, 18 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Second Arrest Order]). Two arrest warrants were issued by London Metropolitan Magistrates for Pinochet's arrest in England, both at the request of Investigating Magistrate Baltasar Garzón, sitting in the Audiencia Nacional of Spain in Madrid. The first, to interview General Pinochet as a material witness in the Spanish proceedings, was issued on 16 October 1998. The second, for his provisional arrest for the crimes described above, was issued on 22 October 1998. The excerpt above comes from the request for the second arrest warrant, apparently translated from the original Spanish, which is set out in paragraph 57 of the opinion of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division, issued on 28 October 1998. The Court held that General Pinochet enjoyed immunity from arrest or extradition based on his status as a former head of state, subject to review by the House of Lords. The Divisional Court's opinion was part of protracted appellate proceedings in England dealing primarily with the issue of General Pinochet's immunity as a former head of state. The British proceedings garnered international attention and will not be reiterated here, except by reference. The full text of the Divisional Court's opinion can be found on the Internet at (visited 17 June 1999). The decision of the Divisional Court was reversed by a 3-2 decision of the House of Lords in Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] 4 All E.R. 897 (H.L. 1998), available on (visited on 17 June 1999). This decision of the House of Lords, in turn, was vacated when one of the Lords was found to have a conflict of interest. See Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2), [1999] 1 All E.R. 577 (H.L. 1999). The Lords' second decision, rendered by a seven-member panel on 24 March 1999, again concluded, this time by a margin of 6-1, that the General did not enjoy head-of-state immunity from prosecution and was thus subject to extradition to Spain. However, because of its interpretation of England's obligations under domestic legislation on torture adopted pursuant to the Convention Against Torture, the Court limited the scope of the extradition inquiry to alleged crimes of torture and conspiracy to commit torture occurring after 8 December 1988. Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), [1999] 2 All E.R. 97, 98, 115 (H.L. 1999) [hereinafter Pinochet (No. 3)]. A decision by British Home Secretary Jack Straw permitted the case to proceed into extradition. Letter from Jack Straw about the Extradition of Pinochet, 15 April 1999, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Although appealed by Pinochet's lawyers, Straw's decision was upheld, clearing the way, as of this writing, for the extradition process to begin. See Clare Dyer, Pinochet Fails in Latest Bid to Fight Off Extradition, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 28 May 1999.
6. In re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] All E.R. (D) 629 (Q.B. Div'l Ct. 1998), at ¶ 57 (quoting Ampliación y fundamentación del Auto ordenando la prisión provisional incondicional de AUGUSTO PINOCHET y su detención [Amplification and Foundation for an Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusta Pinochet and His Detention], Madrid, 18 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Second Arrest Order]). Two arrest warrants were issued by London Metropolitan Magistrates for Pinochet's arrest in England, both at the request of Investigating Magistrate Baltasar Garzón, sitting in the Audiencia Nacional of Spain in Madrid. The first, to interview General Pinochet as a material witness in the Spanish proceedings, was issued on 16 October 1998. The second, for his provisional arrest for the crimes described above, was issued on 22 October 1998. The excerpt above comes from the request for the second arrest warrant, apparently translated from the original Spanish, which is set out in paragraph 57 of the opinion of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division, issued on 28 October 1998. The Court held that General Pinochet enjoyed immunity from arrest or extradition based on his status as a former head of state, subject to review by the House of Lords. The Divisional Court's opinion was part of protracted appellate proceedings in England dealing primarily with the issue of General Pinochet's immunity as a former head of state. The British proceedings garnered international attention and will not be reiterated here, except by reference. The full text of the Divisional Court's opinion can be found on the Internet at (visited 17 June 1999). The decision of the Divisional Court was reversed by a 3-2 decision of the House of Lords in Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] 4 All E.R. 897 (H.L. 1998), available on (visited on 17 June 1999). This decision of the House of Lords, in turn, was vacated when one of the Lords was found to have a conflict of interest. See Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2), [1999] 1 All E.R. 577 (H.L. 1999). The Lords' second decision, rendered by a seven-member panel on 24 March 1999, again concluded, this time by a margin of 6-1, that the General did not enjoy head-of-state immunity from prosecution and was thus subject to extradition to Spain. However, because of its interpretation of England's obligations under domestic legislation on torture adopted pursuant to the Convention Against Torture, the Court limited the scope of the extradition inquiry to alleged crimes of torture and conspiracy to commit torture occurring after 8 December 1988. Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), [1999] 2 All E.R. 97, 98, 115 (H.L. 1999) [hereinafter Pinochet (No. 3)]. A decision by British Home Secretary Jack Straw permitted the case to proceed into extradition. Letter from Jack Straw about the Extradition of Pinochet, 15 April 1999, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Although appealed by Pinochet's lawyers, Straw's decision was upheld, clearing the way, as of this writing, for the extradition process to begin. See Clare Dyer, Pinochet Fails in Latest Bid to Fight Off Extradition, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 28 May 1999.
7. In re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] All E.R. (D) 629 (Q.B. Div'l Ct. 1998), at ¶ 57 (quoting Ampliación y fundamentación del Auto ordenando la prisión provisional incondicional de AUGUSTO PINOCHET y su detención [Amplification and Foundation for an Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusta Pinochet and His Detention], Madrid, 18 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Second Arrest Order]). Two arrest warrants were issued by London Metropolitan Magistrates for Pinochet's arrest in England, both at the request of Investigating Magistrate Baltasar Garzón, sitting in the Audiencia Nacional of Spain in Madrid. The first, to interview General Pinochet as a material witness in the Spanish proceedings, was issued on 16 October 1998. The second, for his provisional arrest for the crimes described above, was issued on 22 October 1998. The excerpt above comes from the request for the second arrest warrant, apparently translated from the original Spanish, which is set out in paragraph 57 of the opinion of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division, issued on 28 October 1998. The Court held that General Pinochet enjoyed immunity from arrest or extradition based on his status as a former head of state, subject to review by the House of Lords. The Divisional Court's opinion was part of protracted appellate proceedings in England dealing primarily with the issue of General Pinochet's immunity as a former head of state. The British proceedings garnered international attention and will not be reiterated here, except by reference. The full text of the Divisional Court's opinion can be found on the Internet at (visited 17 June 1999). The decision of the Divisional Court was reversed by a 3-2 decision of the House of Lords in Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte, [1998] 4 All E.R. 897 (H.L. 1998), available on (visited on 17 June 1999). This decision of the House of Lords, in turn, was vacated when one of the Lords was found to have a conflict of interest. See Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2), [1999] 1 All E.R. 577 (H.L. 1999). The Lords' second decision, rendered by a seven-member panel on 24 March 1999, again concluded, this time by a margin of 6-1, that the General did not enjoy head-of-state immunity from prosecution and was thus subject to extradition to Spain. However, because of its interpretation of England's obligations under domestic legislation on torture adopted pursuant to the Convention Against Torture, the Court limited the scope of the extradition inquiry to alleged crimes of torture and conspiracy to commit torture occurring after 8 December 1988. Reg. v. Bow St. Metro. Stipendiary Mag. and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), [1999] 2 All E.R. 97, 98, 115 (H.L. 1999) [hereinafter Pinochet (No. 3)]. A decision by British Home Secretary Jack Straw permitted the case to proceed into extradition. Letter from Jack Straw about the Extradition of Pinochet, 15 April 1999, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Although appealed by Pinochet's lawyers, Straw's decision was upheld, clearing the way, as of this writing, for the extradition process to begin. See Clare Dyer, Pinochet Fails in Latest Bid to Fight Off Extradition, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 28 May 1999.
8. Isabel Allende, Chilean member of Congress and daughter of murdered president Salvador Allende, argues that this familiar aphorism, attributed to the General, in fact demonstrates the depth of his complicity in the crimes of his era. Francesc Relea, La hija de Allende penso en todo momento que su padre no sobreviviria [The Daughter of Allende Always Thought That Her Father Wouldn't Survive], EL PAIS (Madrid), 20 Sept. 1997, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file.
9. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 623 (6th ed. 1990).
10. See Second Arrest Order, supra note 2, at the first paragraph of the section entitled "Razonamientos Jurídicos" [Juridical Foundations]. This and other helpful documents regarding the trials in Spain can be found, largely in the original Spanish, on the Internet at the Equipo Nizkor website at .
11. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
12. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
13. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
14. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
15. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
16. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
17. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
18. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
19. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
20. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
21. The Pinochet era is reviewed, summarizing these events and others, in a profile of the General which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, ironically, during the week of his arrest in England. Jon Lee Anderson, The Dictator, NEW YORKER, 19 Oct. 1998, at 44, 52. More extensive scholarly treatments include Hugo Fruhling, Stages of Repression and Legal Strategy for the Defense of Human Rights in Chile: 1973-1980, 5 HUM. RTS. Q. 510 (1983); Roland Bersier, Legal Instruments of Political Repression in Chile, INT'L COMM'N JURISTS REV., June 1985, at 54; William D. Zabel, et al., Human Rights and the Administration of Justice in Chile: Report of a Delegation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and of the International Bar Association, 43 REC. ASS'N B. CITY N.Y. 431 (1987); Watson W. Galleher, State Repression's Facade of Legality: The Military Courts in Chile, 2 TEMPLE INT'L & COMP. L.J. 183 (1988); Thomas Andrew O'Keefe, The Use of the Military Justice System to Try Civilians in Chile, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1989, at 43; Edward C. Snyder, The Dirty Legal War: Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Chile 1973-1995, 2 TULSA J. COMP. & INT'L L. 253 (1995). There is also a series of reports on the human rights situation in Chile, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which accurately document the legal and human rights issues during the years of military rule. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.34, doc. 21, 25 Oct. 1974; Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.37, doc. 19, corr. 1, 28 June 1976; Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/ Ser.L/V/II.40, doc. 10, 11 Feb. 1977; Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile, Inter-Am. C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, doc. 17, 27 Sept. 1985.
22. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
23. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
24. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
25. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
26. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
27. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
28. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
29. For an excellent insider's account of the Nuremberg Trials themselves, see TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS: A PERSONAL MEMOIR (1992). A comprehensive review of that book and the literature is available in Jonathan A. Bush, Nuremberg: The Modern Law of War and Its Limitations, 93 COLUM. L. REV. 2022 (1993) (book review). The literature on the evolution of the Nuremberg principles from that era to modern war crimes contexts is growing constantly. See, e.g., STEVEN R. RATNER & JASON S. ABRAMS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: BEYOND THE NUREMBERG LEGACY (1997); THEODOR MERON, WAR CRIMES LAW COMES OF AGE: ESSAYS (1998); Symposium, 1945-1995: Critical Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trials and State Accountability, 12 N.Y.L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 453 (1995); Symposium, War Crimes Tribunals, Past, Present, and Future, 3 HOFSTRA L. & POL'Y SYMP. 1 (1999). See also Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Nurem-berg Principles and the Gulf War, 66 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. 711 (1992); M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy-Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 11 (1997).
30. While the US press gave little attention to the ongoing investigation of the Argentine and Chilean cases in Spain, the press coverage in those three countries of the trials was massive. Newspaper articles over the two-year period before the arrest of Pinochet averaged at least a score a month and sometimes exceeded one hundred stories a month on the topic.
31. Michael S. Serrill, "Dirty War" Crimes: A Resolute Spanish Judge Seeks Justice for the Victims of a Shameful Episode in Argentina's Past, TIME (Int'l Ed.), 21 Oct. 1996; Marlise Simons, Unforgiving Spain Pursues Argentine Killers, N.Y. TIMES, 24 Oct. 1996, at A3.
32. Michael S. Serrill, "Dirty War" Crimes: A Resolute Spanish Judge Seeks Justice for the Victims of a Shameful Episode in Argentina's Past, TIME (Int'l Ed.), 21 Oct. 1996; Marlise Simons, Unforgiving Spain Pursues Argentine Killers, N.Y. TIMES, 24 Oct. 1996, at A3.
33. Tito Drago, Chile: Pinochet Accused of Genocide Before a Spanish Court, INTER PRESS SERVICE, 4 July 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, INPRES file.
34. See Joan E. Garcés, Pinochet, Ante la Audiencia Nacional y el Derecho Penal Internacional [Pinochet Before the National Audience and International Criminal Justice], KOĀǦA RON̄ÉĚTĀ, Mar. 1997, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Garcés, one of the principal private prosecutors for Chilean victims, formally spells his first name "Joan" in the style of his Catalan roots. The Spanish spelling is "Juan."
35. Judge Garzón became famous in Spain when he directed investigations into allegations of state involvement in death squad activity against the Basque separatist group ETA and its supporters in the mid-1980s, which led, according to many, to the fall of the government of former Socialist Prime Minister Felipe Gonzalez. See Giles Tremlett, Spanish Party Urges Argentine Prosecution, U.P.I., BC CYCLE, 7 May 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, UPI file.
36. The basic character of the Audiencia Nacional is set out in Articles 62-69 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch. Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial [Organic Law of the Judicial Branch] [L.O.P.J.] arts. 62-69. The Audiencia was first created in 1977 on the same day that the Public Order Courts (known by their Spanish acronym, "TOP") were abolished. The TOP were a tool for popular suppression manipulated and controlled by the fascist leader from 1939-1975, Francisco Franco. See MARTA VILADOT SANTALÓ, LA AUDIENCIA NACIONAE 1977-1997, at 13, 16-19 (1998). The Audiencia has since distinguished itself as an important and distinctive device in crime control, and is widely supported by the full range of political parties in Spain. See id. at 169-83. While France had a court of comparable jurisdiction, the Tribunal for Security of the State, that entity was abolished in 1981. In other European countries - Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom - and the United States, the statutory power to pursue international crimes is largely vested in public prosecutors, not in the courts. See id. at 158-65.
37. The popular action is embodied in several provisions of Spanish law. The Constitution, in Article 125, says, "Citizens may exercise popular action and participate in the Administration of Justice. . . ." Constitucion Espanola de 1978 [Spanish Constitution of 1978] [C.E.] art. 125. In the Law of Criminal Procedure, Article 101 provides that "[t]he criminal action is public. All Spanish citizens may exercise it in accordance with the Law." Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal [Law of Criminal Procedure] [L.E.Crim.] art. 101. Article 270 states that "(a]ll Spanish citizens, whether or not they are victims of the crime, may file a complaint [querellarse] by exercising the popular action established in article 101 of this Law." L.E.Crim. art. 270. Article 20.3 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch guarantees that the popular action can be exercised without cost. L.O.P.J. art. 20.3.
38. LORENZO BUJOSA VADELL, LA PROTECCIÓN JURISDICIONAL DE LOS INTERESES DE GRUPO [JURISDICTIONAL PROTECTION OF CROUP INTERESTS] 286 (1995). Bujosa Vadell notes that there are similar standing provisions in the laws of Portugal and Brazil. Id. at 287.
39. Tremlett, supra note 12. See also Ejerce la Acción Popular la Coalición Izquierda Unida, en España [United Left Coalition Files Popular Action in Spain], 6 May 1996, available on (visited 2 Aug. 1999).
40. Tito Drago, Human Rights: Spanish Judges Press Latin American Dictators, INTER PRESS SERVICE, 15 Sept. 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, INPRES file.
41. No specific order or pleading contains this information, but a direct reference and quote to the records of two National Attorneys General, D. Carlos Granados and D. Jesus Cardenal, indicates that the public prosecutors formally affirmed the jurisdiction of the Audiencia in the Chilean case in July 1996 and September 1997. Electronic mail message from Juan E. Garcés to Prosecution Team in the Pinochet case, 16 Jan. 1998 (on file with author).
42. Public prosecutors filed a series of legal challenges to the actions of the investigating magistrates, beginning with the following: Recurso de la Fiscalía contra la prisión provisional incondicional de Agusto [sic] Pinochet Ugarte [Appeal by the Prosecution Against the Unconditional Provisional Imprisonment of Augusto Pinochet Ugarte], Madrid, 17 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999). There was a brief closure of the Chilean case in March 1998, when the prosecutor requested dismissal for lack of jurisdiction after revelations by the DINA's director, Manuel Contreras, that he had taken all of his actions only on direct orders from General Pinochet. After a brief appeal which quickly overturned the trial court's action as inappropriate, the investigation continued. Spain-Chile: Writ of the Instructing Court Accepting the Jurisdiction in the Pinochet Case, Madrid, 15 Sept. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
43. Public prosecutors filed a series of legal challenges to the actions of the investigating magistrates, beginning with the following: Recurso de la Fiscalía contra la prisión provisional incondicional de Agusto [sic] Pinochet Ugarte [Appeal by the Prosecution Against the Unconditional Provisional Imprisonment of Augusto Pinochet Ugarte], Madrid, 17 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999). There was a brief closure of the Chilean case in March 1998, when the prosecutor requested dismissal for lack of jurisdiction after revelations by the DINA's director, Manuel Contreras, that he had taken all of his actions only on direct orders from General Pinochet. After a brief appeal which quickly overturned the trial court's action as inappropriate, the investigation continued. Spain-Chile: Writ of the Instructing Court Accepting the Jurisdiction in the Pinochet Case, Madrid, 15 Sept. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
44. They included the Comité de Defensa de los Derechos Humanos (Committee for the Defense of Human Rights, or "CODEPU"), Fundación de Ayuda Social de las Iglesias Cristianas (Foundation of Christian Churches for Social Aid, or "FASIC"), and Servicio de Paz Y justicia en Chile (Peace and Justice Service in Chile, or "SERPAJ Chile").
45. They included the Comité de Defensa de los Derechos Humanos (Committee for the Defense of Human Rights, or "CODEPU"), Fundación de Ayuda Social de las Iglesias Cristianas (Foundation of Christian Churches for Social Aid, or "FASIC"), and Servicio de Paz Y justicia en Chile (Peace and Justice Service in Chile, or "SERPAJ Chile").
46. For background on the work of these groups, prior to and during the arrest of General Pinochet, see Special Report on the Preparation and Development of General Pinochet's Detention and Spanish Judges' Ruling Recognizing the Principle of Universal Criminal Jurisdiction for Domestic Courts, 5 Nov. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
47. See Drago, supra note 10.
48. See Serrill, supra note 9.
49. One scholar documents the work of Jorge Antonio Bergés, a physician known as "Dr. Death," for his work in monitoring torture victims and later involvement in the delivery and sale of children of kidnaped women. MARGUERITE FEITLOWITZ, A LEXICON OF TERROR: ARGENTINA AND THE LEGACIES OF TORTURE 238-40 (1998).
50. See Jaime Malamud-Goti, Punishing Human Rights Abuses in Fledgling Democracies: The Case of Argentina, in IMPUNITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PRACTICE 160 (Naomi Roht-Arriaza ed., 1995); Jorge Mera, Chile: Truth and Justice Under the Democratic Government, in IMPUNITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PRACTICE 171 (Naomi Roht-Arriaza ed., 1995).
51. See Jaime Malamud-Goti, Punishing Human Rights Abuses in Fledgling Democracies: The Case of Argentina, in IMPUNITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PRACTICE 160 (Naomi Roht-Arriaza ed., 1995); Jorge Mera, Chile: Truth and Justice Under the Democratic Government, in IMPUNITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PRACTICE 171 (Naomi Roht-Arriaza ed., 1995).
52. The only international treaty on the subject is the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons, adopted 9 June 1994, O.A.S. Doc. OEA/Ser.P/AG/ doc.3114/94, art. 5 (1994), reprinted in 33 I.L.M. 1529 (1994), which entered into force in the Americas on 29 March 1991. See ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, BASIC DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM, OEA/Ser.L.V/II.92, doc. 31, rev. 3, 3 May 1996, at 99, 107. Good academic treatments of the subject of disappearances in the region are Reed Brody & Felipe Gonzalez, Nunca Mas: An Analysis of International Instruments on "Disappearances," 19 HUM. RTS. Q. 365 (1997); Wolfgang S. Heinz, Motives for 'Disappearances' in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay in the 1970s, 13 NETH. Q. HUM. RTS. 51 (1995).
53. The only international treaty on the subject is the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons, adopted 9 June 1994, O.A.S. Doc. OEA/Ser.P/AG/ doc.3114/94, art. 5 (1994), reprinted in 33 I.L.M. 1529 (1994), which entered into force in the Americas on 29 March 1991. See ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, BASIC DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM, OEA/Ser.L.V/II.92, doc. 31, rev. 3, 3 May 1996, at 99, 107. Good academic treatments of the subject of disappearances in the region are Reed Brody & Felipe Gonzalez, Nunca Mas: An Analysis of International Instruments on "Disappearances," 19 HUM. RTS. Q. 365 (1997); Wolfgang S. Heinz, Motives for 'Disappearances' in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay in the 1970s, 13 NETH. Q. HUM. RTS. 51 (1995).
54. The only international treaty on the subject is the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons, adopted 9 June 1994, O.A.S. Doc. OEA/Ser.P/AG/ doc.3114/94, art. 5 (1994), reprinted in 33 I.L.M. 1529 (1994), which entered into force in the Americas on 29 March 1991. See ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES, BASIC DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM, OEA/Ser.L.V/II.92, doc. 31, rev. 3, 3 May 1996, at 99, 107. Good academic treatments of the subject of disappearances in the region are Reed Brody & Felipe Gonzalez, Nunca Mas: An Analysis of International Instruments on "Disappearances," 19 HUM. RTS. Q. 365 (1997); Wolfgang S. Heinz, Motives for 'Disappearances' in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay in the 1970s, 13 NETH. Q. HUM. RTS. 51 (1995).
55. This practice is by no means unusual, as many countries have no specific offense of "forced disappearance." It is for that reason, for example, that the UN Declaration on Forced Disappearances uses the term "acts of enforced disappearance" rather than making reference to a specific crime. See Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, G.A. Res. 47/133, U.N. GAOR, 47th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 207, U.N. Doc. A/47/49 (1993).
56. See Serrill, supra note 9.
57. El Juez Garzon Resuelve sobre el Ex Represor [Judge Garzon to Decide on Ex Repressor], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 10 Oct. 1997.
58. See FEITLOWITZ, supra note 24, at 197, 254.
59. See id. at 194.
60. Id. at 254.
61. See id. at 255.
62. See Clifford Krauss, Spanish Judge Investigating Rights Abuses in Argentina, N.Y. TIMES, 29 Nov. 1998, at 4.
63. Argentina: Baby-Theft Probe Expands, N.Y. TIMES, 4 Dec. 1998, at A6.
64. Dicen que Pinochet fue el responsoble del homicidio de Prats [They Say Pinochet Was Responsible for the Murder of Prats], LA NACION (Buenos Aires), 24 May 1999 (describing testimony in Argentina of Eugene Propper, one of the US Attorneys responsible for obtaining testimony from Michael Townley, a DINA agent accused of the assassination in Washington, DC of Chilean diplomat Orlando Letelier, discussed infra text accompanying notes 60-63).
65. Orden de prisión provisional incondicional de Leopoldo Fortunato Galtieri [Order for the Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Leopoldo Fortunato Galtieri], Madrid, 25 Mar. 1997, available on (visited 17 June 1999); Auto de procesamiento y detención del Almte Luis Eduardo Massera y nueve más [Order for the Charge and Detention of Admiral Luis Eduardo Massera and Nine Others], Madrid, 10 Oct. 1997, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
66. Orden de prisión provisional incondicional de Leopoldo Fortunato Galtieri [Order for the Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Leopoldo Fortunato Galtieri], Madrid, 25 Mar. 1997, available on (visited 17 June 1999); Auto de procesamiento y detención del Almte Luis Eduardo Massera y nueve más [Order for the Charge and Detention of Admiral Luis Eduardo Massera and Nine Others], Madrid, 10 Oct. 1997, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
67. Juan Carlos Alganaraz, Causa por Desaparecidos Espanoles [Case on Spanish Disappeared], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 11 Jan. 1998. See also Auto [Order], available on (visited 17 June 1999) (formal charges brought against 36 additional Argentine military officers).
68. Juan Carlos Alganaraz, Causa por Desaparecidos Espanoles [Case on Spanish Disappeared], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 11 Jan. 1998. See also Auto [Order], available on (visited 17 June 1999) (formal charges brought against 36 additional Argentine military officers).
69. Francesc Relea, 38 amigos de Pinochet recluidos en Chile [38 Friends of Pinochet Secluded in Chile], EL PAIS (Madrid), 3 May 1999, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file.
70. See FEITLOWITZ, supra note 24, at 254.
71. See id. at 246.
72. During the Dirty War, Tucuman reported between 700 and 3,000 disappeared, from a population of 1.3 million. After revelations of his secret accounts, Bussi publicly and tearfully berated his "leftist" pursuers. See Andrea Mandel-Campbell, Where the Ghosts of War Are Rising . . . And May Bring Down a Governor, BUSINESS WEEK (Int'l Ed.), 6 Apr. 1998, at 4; Clifford Krauss, An Out-of-Step Kind of Place Stands by Its Man, N.Y. TIMES, 20 July 1998, at A4; General Bussi, LATIN AMERICA WEEKLY REPORT (London), 17 Mar. 1998, at 132.
73. During the Dirty War, Tucuman reported between 700 and 3,000 disappeared, from a population of 1.3 million. After revelations of his secret accounts, Bussi publicly and tearfully berated his "leftist" pursuers. See Andrea Mandel-Campbell, Where the Ghosts of War Are Rising . . . And May Bring Down a Governor, BUSINESS WEEK (Int'l Ed.), 6 Apr. 1998, at 4; Clifford Krauss, An Out-of-Step Kind of Place Stands by Its Man, N.Y. TIMES, 20 July 1998, at A4; General Bussi, LATIN AMERICA WEEKLY REPORT (London), 17 Mar. 1998, at 132.
74. During the Dirty War, Tucuman reported between 700 and 3,000 disappeared, from a population of 1.3 million. After revelations of his secret accounts, Bussi publicly and tearfully berated his "leftist" pursuers. See Andrea Mandel-Campbell, Where the Ghosts of War Are Rising . . . And May Bring Down a Governor, BUSINESS WEEK (Int'l Ed.), 6 Apr. 1998, at 4; Clifford Krauss, An Out-of-Step Kind of Place Stands by Its Man, N.Y. TIMES, 20 July 1998, at A4; General Bussi, LATIN AMERICA WEEKLY REPORT (London), 17 Mar. 1998, at 132.
75. The judge acted as early as June 1997 to request the freezing of Swiss accounts, after information appeared in the press indicating that several trunks of microfilmed records of the Argentine repression had passed through Spain, been copied, then passed on to Swiss banks for safekeeping. See Marlise Simons, Swiss Freeze the Assets of Four Argentines Accused in Spain, N.Y. TIMES, 4 July 1997, at A4; Garzon ordena el embargo de las cuentas suizas de varios miltares argentinos [Garzon Orders the Embargo of Swiss Accounts of Various Argentine Soldiers], EL PAIS (Madrid), 27 June 1997, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file. Later, his formal request for the names of account holders, based on a list of about 100 names he sent to Switzerland, yielded information from the Swiss authorities that accounts were held in the names of Antonio Bussi, Alfredo Astiz and several other Argentine military personnel. See Juan Gasparini, Derechos Humanos: Investigacion de Apropriacion de Bienes Durante la Represion del Estado: Bussi, Astiz figuran en las cuentas suizas [Human Rights: Investigation into Appropriation of Property During State Repression: Bussi, Astiz Show Up in Swiss Accounts], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 13 Feb. 1998. The revelations began domestic investigations of the soldiers, much like those against Bussi, for alleged tax evasion, illicit enrichment or other financial misconduct. See Calvin Sims, Argentines Press ExSoldiers on Swiss Cash, N.Y. TIMES, 24 Feb. 1998, at A3.
76. The judge acted as early as June 1997 to request the freezing of Swiss accounts, after information appeared in the press indicating that several trunks of microfilmed records of the Argentine repression had passed through Spain, been copied, then passed on to Swiss banks for safekeeping. See Marlise Simons, Swiss Freeze the Assets of Four Argentines Accused in Spain, N.Y. TIMES, 4 July 1997, at A4; Garzon ordena el embargo de las cuentas suizas de varios miltares argentinos [Garzon Orders the Embargo of Swiss Accounts of Various Argentine Soldiers], EL PAIS (Madrid), 27 June 1997, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file. Later, his formal request for the names of account holders, based on a list of about 100 names he sent to Switzerland, yielded information from the Swiss authorities that accounts were held in the names of Antonio Bussi, Alfredo Astiz and several other Argentine military personnel. See Juan Gasparini, Derechos Humanos: Investigacion de Apropriacion de Bienes Durante la Represion del Estado: Bussi, Astiz figuran en las cuentas suizas [Human Rights: Investigation into Appropriation of Property During State Repression: Bussi, Astiz Show Up in Swiss Accounts], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 13 Feb. 1998. The revelations began domestic investigations of the soldiers, much like those against Bussi, for alleged tax evasion, illicit enrichment or other financial misconduct. See Calvin Sims, Argentines Press ExSoldiers on Swiss Cash, N.Y. TIMES, 24 Feb. 1998, at A3.
77. The judge acted as early as June 1997 to request the freezing of Swiss accounts, after information appeared in the press indicating that several trunks of microfilmed records of the Argentine repression had passed through Spain, been copied, then passed on to Swiss banks for safekeeping. See Marlise Simons, Swiss Freeze the Assets of Four Argentines Accused in Spain, N.Y. TIMES, 4 July 1997, at A4; Garzon ordena el embargo de las cuentas suizas de varios miltares argentinos [Garzon Orders the Embargo of Swiss Accounts of Various Argentine Soldiers], EL PAIS (Madrid), 27 June 1997, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file. Later, his formal request for the names of account holders, based on a list of about 100 names he sent to Switzerland, yielded information from the Swiss authorities that accounts were held in the names of Antonio Bussi, Alfredo Astiz and several other Argentine military personnel. See Juan Gasparini, Derechos Humanos: Investigacion de Apropriacion de Bienes Durante la Represion del Estado: Bussi, Astiz figuran en las cuentas suizas [Human Rights: Investigation into Appropriation of Property During State Repression: Bussi, Astiz Show Up in Swiss Accounts], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 13 Feb. 1998. The revelations began domestic investigations of the soldiers, much like those against Bussi, for alleged tax evasion, illicit enrichment or other financial misconduct. See Calvin Sims, Argentines Press ExSoldiers on Swiss Cash, N.Y. TIMES, 24 Feb. 1998, at A3.
78. The judge acted as early as June 1997 to request the freezing of Swiss accounts, after information appeared in the press indicating that several trunks of microfilmed records of the Argentine repression had passed through Spain, been copied, then passed on to Swiss banks for safekeeping. See Marlise Simons, Swiss Freeze the Assets of Four Argentines Accused in Spain, N.Y. TIMES, 4 July 1997, at A4; Garzon ordena el embargo de las cuentas suizas de varios miltares argentinos [Garzon Orders the Embargo of Swiss Accounts of Various Argentine Soldiers], EL PAIS (Madrid), 27 June 1997, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file. Later, his formal request for the names of account holders, based on a list of about 100 names he sent to Switzerland, yielded information from the Swiss authorities that accounts were held in the names of Antonio Bussi, Alfredo Astiz and several other Argentine military personnel. See Juan Gasparini, Derechos Humanos: Investigacion de Apropriacion de Bienes Durante la Represion del Estado: Bussi, Astiz figuran en las cuentas suizas [Human Rights: Investigation into Appropriation of Property During State Repression: Bussi, Astiz Show Up in Swiss Accounts], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 13 Feb. 1998. The revelations began domestic investigations of the soldiers, much like those against Bussi, for alleged tax evasion, illicit enrichment or other financial misconduct. See Calvin Sims, Argentines Press ExSoldiers on Swiss Cash, N.Y. TIMES, 24 Feb. 1998, at A3.
79. Manuel Délano, La justicia chilena recibe una solicitud de Garzón para bloquear las cuentas de Pinochet [Chilean Courts Receive a Petition from Garzon to Block Pinochet's Accounts], EL PAIS (Madrid), 10 Mar. 1999, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file.
80. Laura Termine, Italia enjuiciará a militares argentinos por los desaparecidos [Italy Will Try Argentine Military for the Disappeared], PAGINA 12 (Buenos Aires), 21 May 1999. There is a website dedicated to the Italian cases at (visited on 17 June 1999). See also Argentine Junta Accused of Role in Italian's Deaths, AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE, 7 May 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file. The government has joined private prosecutors in actions against several of the most serious violators. See Claudio Tognonato, El Gobierno Italiano Contra los Genocidas Argentinos [The Italian Government Against the Argentine Genocideres], PAGINA 12 (Buenos Aires), 18 June 1998.
81. Laura Termine, Italia enjuiciará a militares argentinos por los desaparecidos [Italy Will Try Argentine Military for the Disappeared], PAGINA 12 (Buenos Aires), 21 May 1999. There is a website dedicated to the Italian cases at (visited on 17 June 1999). See also Argentine Junta Accused of Role in Italian's Deaths, AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE, 7 May 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file. The government has joined private prosecutors in actions against several of the most serious violators. See Claudio Tognonato, El Gobierno Italiano Contra los Genocidas Argentinos [The Italian Government Against the Argentine Genocideres], PAGINA 12 (Buenos Aires), 18 June 1998.
82. Laura Termine, Italia enjuiciará a militares argentinos por los desaparecidos [Italy Will Try Argentine Military for the Disappeared], PAGINA 12 (Buenos Aires), 21 May 1999. There is a website dedicated to the Italian cases at (visited on 17 June 1999). See also Argentine Junta Accused of Role in Italian's Deaths, AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE, 7 May 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file. The government has joined private prosecutors in actions against several of the most serious violators. See Claudio Tognonato, El Gobierno Italiano Contra los Genocidas Argentinos [The Italian Government Against the Argentine Genocideres], PAGINA 12 (Buenos Aires), 18 June 1998.
83. See Celestine Bohlen, Italy Convicts Ex-SS Officers in '44 Killings, N.Y. TIMES, 23 July 1997, at A4.
84. A good summary of the original German action can be found in Katya Salazar, Will There be Justice for the Germans Disappeared in Argentina?, WITHOUT IMPUNITY, July 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Other, newer actions apparently emerged in the wake of Pinochet's arrest. See Three Lawsuits Against Pinochet in Germany, AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE, 2 Nov. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file; Desaparecidos de Origen Germano: Alemania abrirá sus archivos [German Disappeared: Germany Will Open Its Files], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 4 May 1999.
85. A good summary of the original German action can be found in Katya Salazar, Will There be Justice for the Germans Disappeared in Argentina?, WITHOUT IMPUNITY, July 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Other, newer actions apparently emerged in the wake of Pinochet's arrest. See Three Lawsuits Against Pinochet in Germany, AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE, 2 Nov. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file; Desaparecidos de Origen Germano: Alemania abrirá sus archivos [German Disappeared: Germany Will Open Its Files], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 4 May 1999.
86. A good summary of the original German action can be found in Katya Salazar, Will There be Justice for the Germans Disappeared in Argentina?, WITHOUT IMPUNITY, July 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999). Other, newer actions apparently emerged in the wake of Pinochet's arrest. See Three Lawsuits Against Pinochet in Germany, AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE, 2 Nov. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file; Desaparecidos de Origen Germano: Alemania abrirá sus archivos [German Disappeared: Germany Will Open Its Files], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 4 May 1999.
87. See Argentine Captain Sentenced in Absentia for Torturing Nuns, REUTERS, 16 Mar. 1990; Serrill, supra note 9, at 1.
88. See Charges Filed in Switzerland against Pinochet, Swiss RADIO INTERNATIONAL, 26 Oct. 1998.
89. See Demands for Pinochet Trial Spread Through Europe, AGENCE FRANCE PRESS, 3 Nov. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, AFP file.
90. See Abren un juicio en Dinamarca [Case Opened in Denmark], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 12 Mar. 1999.
91. See Solicitan a Corte Suprema de Ecuador la detencion de Pinochet [Detention of Pinochet Sought in Supreme Court of Ecuador], LA TERCERA (Santiago), 1 Dec. 1997. The action there was short-lived. The Supreme Court ruled immediately that no action could be taken against Pinochet unless he was in custody in Ecuador. See id.
92. See Chileans in New Zealand Seek Action on Pinochet, RADIO NEW ZEALAND INTERNATIONAL, 26 Oct. 1998.
93. See Datos para Israel [Data for Israel], CLARIN (Buenos Aires), 4 May 1999 (indicating that Judge Garzón provided testimony of witnesses to Israel on Jews disappeared during the Argentine dictatorship, with "possibility" of trials in Tel Aviv).
94. See Kelly Flaherty, Seeking Redress on U.S. Soil, CALLAW, available on (visited 17 June 1999) (describing federal court action in Miami by Chilean national, Zita Cabello-Barrueto against former Major Armando Fernandez Larios, one of the defendants in Spain, pursuant to the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (1988)).
95. See Paraguay: "Horror Files" Reveal Crimes of Stroessner Regime, INTER PRESS SERVICE GLOBAL INFORMATION NETWORK, 11 Feb. 1993, available in LEXIS, World Library, INPRES file.
96. See Clifford Krauss, Bolivian's Dark Past Starts to Catch Up With Him, N.Y. TIMES, 14 Mar. 1999, at 3; Fiona Adams, President of Bolivia Falls Foul of Old Guevara Ally, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 4 Dec. 1998, at 20.
97. See Clifford Krauss, Bolivian's Dark Past Starts to Catch Up With Him, N.Y. TIMES, 14 Mar. 1999, at 3; Fiona Adams, President of Bolivia Falls Foul of Old Guevara Ally, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 4 Dec. 1998, at 20.
98. See Marcela Valente, Rights-Argentina: Dissatisfaction with Repeal of Amnesty Laws, INTER PRESS SERVICE, 25 Mar. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, INPRES file; Menem Not to Veto Bill Repealing Due Obedience and Amnesty Laws, BBC SUMMARY OF WORLD BROADCASTS, 28 Mar. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, BBCSWB file.
99. See Marcela Valente, Rights-Argentina: Dissatisfaction with Repeal of Amnesty Laws, INTER PRESS SERVICE, 25 Mar. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, INPRES file; Menem Not to Veto Bill Repealing Due Obedience and Amnesty Laws, BBC SUMMARY OF WORLD BROADCASTS, 28 Mar. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, BBCSWB file.
100. In Dossier Secreto, Martin Edwin Anderson points to a study of US police training in Latin America that documents that it was a CIA operative who put "a top Argentine Justice Ministry official in touch with authorities in Uruguay to talk about monitoring political exiles in both countries. The agency also brought Brazilian death squad members to meet with Argentine and Uruguayan police." MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSON, DOSSIER SECRETO: ARGENTINA'S DESAPARECIDOS AND THE MYTH OF THE "DIRTY WAR" 113 (1993).
101. Sources on the murders and subsequent trials can be found infra note 62.
102. Reported decisions on the criminal proceedings are few. See United States v. Sampol, 636 F.2d 621 (D.C. Cir. 1980); United States v. Esquivel, 755 F. Supp. 434 (D.D.C. 1990). Complete accounts of the assassination, investigation and prosecution can be found in JOHN DINGES & SAUL LANDAU, ASSASSINATION ON EMBASSY Row (1980); TAYLOR BRANCH & EUGENE M. PROPPER, LABYRINTH (1982). One of the federal prosecutors in the Letelier case recently wrote a compelling editorial about his own view of Pinochet's complicity. See Lawrence Barcella Jr., The Case We Made, 22 Years Ago, WASHINGTON POST, 6 Dec. 1998.
103. Reported decisions on the criminal proceedings are few. See United States v. Sampol, 636 F.2d 621 (D.C. Cir. 1980); United States v. Esquivel, 755 F. Supp. 434 (D.D.C. 1990). Complete accounts of the assassination, investigation and prosecution can be found in JOHN DINGES & SAUL LANDAU, ASSASSINATION ON EMBASSY Row (1980); TAYLOR BRANCH & EUGENE M. PROPPER, LABYRINTH (1982). One of the federal prosecutors in the Letelier case recently wrote a compelling editorial about his own view of Pinochet's complicity. See Lawrence Barcella Jr., The Case We Made, 22 Years Ago, WASHINGTON POST, 6 Dec. 1998.
104. Reported decisions on the criminal proceedings are few. See United States v. Sampol, 636 F.2d 621 (D.C. Cir. 1980); United States v. Esquivel, 755 F. Supp. 434 (D.D.C. 1990). Complete accounts of the assassination, investigation and prosecution can be found in JOHN DINGES & SAUL LANDAU, ASSASSINATION ON EMBASSY Row (1980); TAYLOR BRANCH & EUGENE M. PROPPER, LABYRINTH (1982). One of the federal prosecutors in the Letelier case recently wrote a compelling editorial about his own view of Pinochet's complicity. See Lawrence Barcella Jr., The Case We Made, 22 Years Ago, WASHINGTON POST, 6 Dec. 1998.
105. See, e.g., Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980); Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 567 F. Supp. 1490 (S.D.N.Y. 1983), aff'd 748 F.2d 790 (2d Cir. 1984). The efforts are summarized in Monroe Leigh, Judicial Decisions, 79 AM. J. INT'L L. 442, 447 (1985). See also Eric H. Singer, Terrorism, Extradition, and FSIA Relief: The Letelier Case, 19 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L 57 (1986).
106. See, e.g., Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980); Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 567 F. Supp. 1490 (S.D.N.Y. 1983), aff'd 748 F.2d 790 (2d Cir. 1984). The efforts are summarized in Monroe Leigh, Judicial Decisions, 79 AM. J. INT'L L. 442, 447 (1985). See also Eric H. Singer, Terrorism, Extradition, and FSIA Relief: The Letelier Case, 19 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L 57 (1986).
107. See Chile-United States Commission Convened Under the 1914 Treaty for the Settlement of Disputes: Decision with Regard to the Dispute Concerning Responsibility for the Deaths of Letelier and Moffitt, 31 I.L.M. 1 (1992). See also Miriam Nash (Leich), Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law, 86 AM. J. INT'L L. 346, 347 (1992).
108. See Chile-United States Commission Convened Under the 1914 Treaty for the Settlement of Disputes: Decision with Regard to the Dispute Concerning Responsibility for the Deaths of Letelier and Moffitt, 31 I.L.M. 1 (1992). See also Miriam Nash (Leich), Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law, 86 AM. J. INT'L L. 346, 347 (1992).
109. 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (1994). The statute permits an alien in the United States to bring an action against another alien here, if personal service can be made, "for a tort . . . . committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." Id. Courts here have applied the statute to find violations of the law of nations when customary international human rights norms, such as the prohibitions on torture, summary execution, disappearance or arbitrary detention, are violated. See generally BETH STEPHENS & MICHAEL RATNER, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LITIGATION IN U.S. COURTS (1996).
110. See, e.g., Rapaport v. Suarez-Mason, No. C87-2266 JPV (N.D. Cal. 11 Apr. 1989); Forti v. Suarez-Mason, No. C-87-2058-DLJ (N.D. Cal. 25 Apr. 1990); Martinez-Baca v. Suarez-Mason, No. C-87-2057 SC (N.D. Cal. 22 Apr. 1988); Siderman v. Argentina, No. CV 82-1772-RMT, 1984 WL 9080 (CD. Cal. 28 Sept. 1984). These cases are summarized in STEPHENS & RATNER, supra note 64, at 343-45.
111. See Giles Tremlett, Spanish Courts Give Hope to Latin America, U.P.I., 11 Dec. 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, UPI file.
112. See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) (1994). The United States also has a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with Spain, which permits broader investigative requests. Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, 20 Nov. 1990, U.S.-Spain, U.S. DEPT. OF STATE, TREATIES IN FORCE: A LIST OF TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES IN FORCE ON JANUARY 1, 1998, at 262. See JORDAN J. PAUST ET AL., INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 558 (1996).
113. See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) (1994). The United States also has a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with Spain, which permits broader investigative requests. Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, 20 Nov. 1990, U.S.-Spain, U.S. DEPT. OF STATE, TREATIES IN FORCE: A LIST OF TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES IN FORCE ON JANUARY 1, 1998, at 262. See JORDAN J. PAUST ET AL., INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 558 (1996).
114. See Ampliación de la Denuncia por otros asesinatos cometidos durante la Operatión Condor [Expansion of Criminal Complaint for Other Assassinations Committed During Operation Condor], Madrid, 20 Sept. 1996, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
115. See Press Release, Congressman George Miller, Members of Congress Call on Clinton to Release Key Information on Gen. Pinochet to Spanish Judge, 21 Oct. 1998, with attachment of letter from William Clinton, The White House, to George Miller, 3 June 1998 (on file with author).
116. See Auto de inhibición del Juzgado Central de Instrucción N6 . . . en favor del Juzgado Central de Instrucción N5 [Order of the 6th Central Instructing Court Ceding to the 5th Central Instructing Court], Madrid, 20 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
117. The judgment of Magistrate Adolfo Banados Cuadra, finding Contreras and Espinoza guilty can be found in FALLOS DEL MES, SECCION CRIMINAL (EDICION SUPLEMENTARIA) [JUDGMENTS OF THE MONTH, CRIMINAL SECTION (SUPPLEMENTAL EDITION)], Nov. 1993 (on file with author). See generally Peter A. Barcroft, International Decisions: Rol. No. 30.174-94 (In re Letelier), 90 AM. J. INT'L L. 290 (1996).
118. The judgment of Magistrate Adolfo Banados Cuadra, finding Contreras and Espinoza guilty can be found in FALLOS DEL MES, SECCION CRIMINAL (EDICION SUPLEMENTARIA) [JUDGMENTS OF THE MONTH, CRIMINAL SECTION (SUPPLEMENTAL EDITION)], Nov. 1993 (on file with author). See generally Peter A. Barcroft, International Decisions: Rol. No. 30.174-94 (In re Letelier), 90 AM. J. INT'L L. 290 (1996).
119. Id. at 292 (alterations in original).
120. Despite his desire for release from Chilean custody, Contreras will apparently be extradited to Italy after completion of his sentence in Chile as a result of his conviction, in absentia, for involvement in the attempted assassination of Bernardo Leighton, a vocal opponent of the Pinochet regime, and his wife, Ana Fresno. See id. at 294 n.16.
121. See Francesc Relea, El testimonio de un general chileno acusa a Pinochet de 53 asesinatos [The Testimony of a Chilean General Accuses Pinochet of 53 Assassinations], EL PAIS (Madrid), 2 Dec. 1997, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file.
122. Open Letter from General Poblete to General Pinochet (Jan. 1998) (on file with author) [hereinafter Open Letter]. See Un general chileno culpa a Pinochet de los desaparecidos [A Chilean General Blames Pinochet for the Disappeared], LA VANGUARDIA (Barcelona), 28 Jan. 1998, available in Westlaw, LAVANGURD database; Un general chileno denuncia a Pinochet y Leigh por torturas y asesinatos [A Chilean General Denounces Pinochet and Leigh for Torture and Assassinations], AGENCIA EUROPA PRESS, 28 Jan. 1998.
123. Open Letter from General Poblete to General Pinochet (Jan. 1998) (on file with author) [hereinafter Open Letter]. See Un general chileno culpa a Pinochet de los desaparecidos [A Chilean General Blames Pinochet for the Disappeared], LA VANGUARDIA (Barcelona), 28 Jan. 1998, available in Westlaw, LAVANGURD database; Un general chileno denuncia a Pinochet y Leigh por torturas y asesinatos [A Chilean General Denounces Pinochet and Leigh for Torture and Assassinations], AGENCIA EUROPA PRESS, 28 Jan. 1998.
124. Open Letter, supra note 75. The open letter from General Poblete is contained in an electronic mail message to the author from Juan Garcés, Madrid, 18 Feb. 1998 (on file with author).
125. Duros cargos de obispo Frenz contra Pinochet [Hard Charges by Bishop Frenz Against Pinochet], LA EPOCA (Santiago), 9 Feb. 1998; Manuel Delano, Una autoridad catolica implica a Pinochet en la muerte de un sacerdote español [A Catholic Authority Implicates Pinochet in the Death of a Spanish Priest], EL PAIS (Madrid), 10 Aug. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file.
126. Duros cargos de obispo Frenz contra Pinochet [Hard Charges by Bishop Frenz Against Pinochet], LA EPOCA (Santiago), 9 Feb. 1998; Manuel Delano, Una autoridad catolica implica a Pinochet en la muerte de un sacerdote español [A Catholic Authority Implicates Pinochet in the Death of a Spanish Priest], EL PAIS (Madrid), 10 Aug. 1998, available in LEXIS, World Library, ELPAIS file.
127. Stella Calloni, Los Archivos del Horror del Operative Condor [The Horror Files of Operation Condor] (1994). This document, published by Argentine journalist Stella Calloni, can be found in Spanish on the Internet at .
128. See Providencia por la que el Magistrado Juez Baltasar Garzón solicita ampliación de rogatoria a Paraguay para la obtención de documentes relacionados con la "Operación Cóndor" [Request in Which Magistrate Judge Baltasar Garzón Solicits Additional Letters Rogatory to Paraguay in Order to Obtain Documents Related to "Operation Condor"], Madrid, 4 Sept. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
129. See Auto del 27 de Abril de 1998 [Order of 27 Apr. 1998] (containing, in paragraph 12, the opening of a new file on the investigation of Operation Condor) (on file with author).
130. Fundamentación de la ampliación de la querella que permitió la orden de prisión provisional incondicional contra Augusto Pinochet Ugarte [Foundation for the Amplification of the Complaint Which Permitted the Order of Unconditional Provisional Arrest of Augusto Pinochet Ugarte], Madrid, 15 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Foundation for the Amplification of the Complaint).
131. Auto de Procesamiento a Pinochet [Order Charging Pinochet), Madrid, 10 Dec. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
132. Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de España para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorismo cometidos durante la dictadura argentina [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Argentina], Madrid, 4 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999); Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de Espana para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorisme cometidos durante la dictadura chilena [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Chile], Madrid, 5 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Ruling of the Audencia Nacional]. Because the other charges were not challenged, it can be assumed that the prosecutions, and perhaps the extradition, could have proceeded even if this appeal was lost, but there is little doubt that an unfavorable ruling in this appeal would have gutted the legal grounds on which the victims sought to establish criminal liability. For an excellent analysis of these rulings and earlier rulings by the Investigating Magistrates in these cases on the same issues, see The Criminal Procedures Against Chilean and Argentinian Repressors in Spain: A Short Summary, Revision One, 11 Nov. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter The Criminal Procedures: A Short Summary].
133. Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de España para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorismo cometidos durante la dictadura argentina [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Argentina], Madrid, 4 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999); Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de Espana para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorisme cometidos durante la dictadura chilena [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Chile], Madrid, 5 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Ruling of the Audencia Nacional]. Because the other charges were not challenged, it can be assumed that the prosecutions, and perhaps the extradition, could have proceeded even if this appeal was lost, but there is little doubt that an unfavorable ruling in this appeal would have gutted the legal grounds on which the victims sought to establish criminal liability. For an excellent analysis of these rulings and earlier rulings by the Investigating Magistrates in these cases on the same issues, see The Criminal Procedures Against Chilean and Argentinian Repressors in Spain: A Short Summary, Revision One, 11 Nov. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter The Criminal Procedures: A Short Summary].
134. Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de España para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorismo cometidos durante la dictadura argentina [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Argentina], Madrid, 4 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999); Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de Espana para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorisme cometidos durante la dictadura chilena [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Chile], Madrid, 5 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Ruling of the Audencia Nacional]. Because the other charges were not challenged, it can be assumed that the prosecutions, and perhaps the extradition, could have proceeded even if this appeal was lost, but there is little doubt that an unfavorable ruling in this appeal would have gutted the legal grounds on which the victims sought to establish criminal liability. For an excellent analysis of these rulings and earlier rulings by the Investigating Magistrates in these cases on the same issues, see The Criminal Procedures Against Chilean and Argentinian Repressors in Spain: A Short Summary, Revision One, 11 Nov. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter The Criminal Procedures: A Short Summary].
135. Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de España para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorismo cometidos durante la dictadura argentina [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Argentina], Madrid, 4 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999); Auto de la Sala de lo Penal de la Audiencia Nacional confirmando la jurisdicción de Espana para conocer de los crímenes de genocidio y terrorisme cometidos durante la dictadura chilena [Ruling of the National Audience on Jurisdiction of Spanish Justice to Pursue Crimes of Genocide in Chile], Madrid, 5 Oct. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter Ruling of the Audencia Nacional]. Because the other charges were not challenged, it can be assumed that the prosecutions, and perhaps the extradition, could have proceeded even if this appeal was lost, but there is little doubt that an unfavorable ruling in this appeal would have gutted the legal grounds on which the victims sought to establish criminal liability. For an excellent analysis of these rulings and earlier rulings by the Investigating Magistrates in these cases on the same issues, see The Criminal Procedures Against Chilean and Argentinian Repressors in Spain: A Short Summary, Revision One, 11 Nov. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999) [hereinafter The Criminal Procedures: A Short Summary].
136. See John G. McCarthy, The Passive Personality Principle and Its Use in Combatting International Terrorism, 13 FORDHAM INT'L L.J. 298 (1990); Geoffrey R. Watson, The Passive Personality Principle, 28 TEX. INT'L L.J. 1 (1993). Passive personality jurisdiction was the basis for a US extradition request for Muhammed Abbas Zaiden, accused of the terrorist act of hijacking the cruise ship Achille Lauro in Egyptian waters and subsequently killing Leon Klinghoffer, a US citizen, in 1985. See United States v. Yunis, 681 F. Supp. 896, 900 (D.D.C. 1988).
137. See John G. McCarthy, The Passive Personality Principle and Its Use in Combatting International Terrorism, 13 FORDHAM INT'L L.J. 298 (1990); Geoffrey R. Watson, The Passive Personality Principle, 28 TEX. INT'L L.J. 1 (1993). Passive personality jurisdiction was the basis for a US extradition request for Muhammed Abbas Zaiden, accused of the terrorist act of hijacking the cruise ship Achille Lauro in Egyptian waters and subsequently killing Leon Klinghoffer, a US citizen, in 1985. See United States v. Yunis, 681 F. Supp. 896, 900 (D.D.C. 1988).
138. L.O.P.J. art. 23.2.
139. L.O.P.J. art. 23.4(a), (b), & (g). I am told by reliable authorities on Spanish law, although without reference to a specific text, that the phrase "such as some of the following crimes" has been interpreted as exclusive, not inclusive, language. Thus, only those crimes specifically listed in the statute are viable subjects of universal jurisdiction.
140. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Four.
141. Id. at Section Three.
142. Id. The first subsection of Article 25 of the Constitution states: "No one can be convicted or sentenced for acts or omissions which, at the moment they occur, are not crimes, misdemeanors or administrative infractions, according to the applicable legislation at that time." C.E. art. 25.1.
143. See Naomi Roht-Arriaza & Lauren Gibson, The Developing Jurisprudence of Amnesty, 20 HUM. RTS. Q. 843, 847 (1998). For other specific treatments of the Chilean amnesty and how it was dealt with internally, see Jorge Correa S., Dealing with Past Human Rights Violations: The Chilean Case After Dictatorship, 67 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (1992); José Zalaquett, Balancing Ethical Imperatives and Political Constraints: The Dilemma of New Democracies Confronting Past Human Rights Violations, 43 HASTINGS L.J. 1425 (1992); Robert J. Quinn, Will the Rule of Law End? Challenging Grants of Amnesty for the Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime: Chile's New Model, 62 FORDHAM L. REV. 905 (1994); Kai Ambos, Impunity and International Criminal Law: A Case Study on Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina, 18 HUM. RTS. L.J. 1 (1997).
144. See Naomi Roht-Arriaza & Lauren Gibson, The Developing Jurisprudence of Amnesty, 20 HUM. RTS. Q. 843, 847 (1998). For other specific treatments of the Chilean amnesty and how it was dealt with internally, see Jorge Correa S., Dealing with Past Human Rights Violations: The Chilean Case After Dictatorship, 67 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (1992); José Zalaquett, Balancing Ethical Imperatives and Political Constraints: The Dilemma of New Democracies Confronting Past Human Rights Violations, 43 HASTINGS L.J. 1425 (1992); Robert J. Quinn, Will the Rule of Law End? Challenging Grants of Amnesty for the Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime: Chile's New Model, 62 FORDHAM L. REV. 905 (1994); Kai Ambos, Impunity and International Criminal Law: A Case Study on Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina, 18 HUM. RTS. L.J. 1 (1997).
145. See Naomi Roht-Arriaza & Lauren Gibson, The Developing Jurisprudence of Amnesty, 20 HUM. RTS. Q. 843, 847 (1998). For other specific treatments of the Chilean amnesty and how it was dealt with internally, see Jorge Correa S., Dealing with Past Human Rights Violations: The Chilean Case After Dictatorship, 67 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (1992); José Zalaquett, Balancing Ethical Imperatives and Political Constraints: The Dilemma of New Democracies Confronting Past Human Rights Violations, 43 HASTINGS L.J. 1425 (1992); Robert J. Quinn, Will the Rule of Law End? Challenging Grants of Amnesty for the Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime: Chile's New Model, 62 FORDHAM L. REV. 905 (1994); Kai Ambos, Impunity and International Criminal Law: A Case Study on Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina, 18 HUM. RTS. L.J. 1 (1997).
146. See Naomi Roht-Arriaza & Lauren Gibson, The Developing Jurisprudence of Amnesty, 20 HUM. RTS. Q. 843, 847 (1998). For other specific treatments of the Chilean amnesty and how it was dealt with internally, see Jorge Correa S., Dealing with Past Human Rights Violations: The Chilean Case After Dictatorship, 67 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (1992); José Zalaquett, Balancing Ethical Imperatives and Political Constraints: The Dilemma of New Democracies Confronting Past Human Rights Violations, 43 HASTINGS L.J. 1425 (1992); Robert J. Quinn, Will the Rule of Law End? Challenging Grants of Amnesty for the Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime: Chile's New Model, 62 FORDHAM L. REV. 905 (1994); Kai Ambos, Impunity and International Criminal Law: A Case Study on Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina, 18 HUM. RTS. L.J. 1 (1997).
147. See Naomi Roht-Arriaza & Lauren Gibson, The Developing Jurisprudence of Amnesty, 20 HUM. RTS. Q. 843, 847 (1998). For other specific treatments of the Chilean amnesty and how it was dealt with internally, see Jorge Correa S., Dealing with Past Human Rights Violations: The Chilean Case After Dictatorship, 67 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (1992); José Zalaquett, Balancing Ethical Imperatives and Political Constraints: The Dilemma of New Democracies Confronting Past Human Rights Violations, 43 HASTINGS L.J. 1425 (1992); Robert J. Quinn, Will the Rule of Law End? Challenging Grants of Amnesty for the Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime: Chile's New Model, 62 FORDHAM L. REV. 905 (1994); Kai Ambos, Impunity and International Criminal Law: A Case Study on Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina, 18 HUM. RTS. L.J. 1 (1997).
148. 2 REPORT OF THE CHILEAN NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION 899 (Phillip E. Berryman trans., 1993) [hereinafter THE RETTIG REPORT].
149. Amnesty International, Chile: Transition at the Crossroads: Human Rights Violations under Pinochet Rule Remain the Crux, AMR 22/01/96, March 1996, at 27.
150. See Roht-Arriaza & Gibson, supra note 90, at 847-48.
151. One report in 1995 put the number of pending cases at about 500. Imogen Mark, Former Security Chief Jailed at Last: Some 500 Court Cases are Still Pending over Chile's 'Disappeared', FINANCIAL TIMES (London), 25 Oct. 1995, at 4.
152. In November 1997, the Second Chamber of the Chilean Supreme Court voted 4-2 to revoke the application of the amnesty. Although the case had symbolic importance, the Court's reasoning has limited application to cases in which no defendant is named, therefore making the amnesty formally inapplicable. See Un tribunal de Chile revoca por primera vez una amnestia dictada por Pinochet [A Chilean Court Revokes, for the First Time, an Amnesty Dictated by Pinochet], EL MUNDO (Madrid), 21 Nov. 1997, available in Westlaw, ELMUNDO database.
153. See Roht-Arriaza & Gibson, supra note 90, at 848-49.
154. Chile Closes the Book on Spanish Diplomat's Murder, REUTERS NORTH AMERICAN WIRE, 23 Aug. 1996.
155. See Hector Marcial Garay Hermosilla et al. v. Chile, Report No. 39/96, Case 10.843, Inter-Am. C.H.R. 156 (1997); Juan Meneses et al. v. Chile, Report
156. The Human Rights Committee's first statement on the issue was its General Comment No. 20, on Article 7 of the Covenant, dealing with torture. There, it stated that "[a]mnesties are generally incompatible with the duty of States to investigate such acts; to guarantee freedom from such acts within their jurisdiction; and to ensure that they do not occur in the future. States may not deprive individuals of the right to an effective remedy. . . ." General Comment on Article 7, General Comment No. 20, U.N. GAOR, Hum. Rts. Comm., 44th Sess., 1139th mtg., addendum, at 1 15, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/ Rev.1/Add.3 (1992). The Committee has reiterated that position in an individual decision. Communication No. 322/1988 (Rodriguez v. Uruguay), U.N. GAOR, Hum. Rts. Comm., U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/51/D/322/1988 (1994), reprinted in 2 INT'L HUM. RTS. REP. 113 (1995), and in the Committee's response to the country report of Argentina, Comments of the Human Rights Committee, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 40 of the Covenant: Argentina, U.N. GAOR, Hum. Rts. Comm., 53d Sess., 1411th mtg., addendum, ¶¶ 3 & 10, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.46 (1995), reprinted in 2 INT'L HUM. RTS. REP. 625 (1995).
157. L.O.P.J. art. 23.
158. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Eight.
159. NUNCA MAS [NEVER AGAIN]: THE REPORT OF THE ARGENTINE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE DISAPPEARED 447 (1st American ed. 1986).
160. There is no single source to document this number accurately. One reasonable effort to count all murdered or disappeared victims in Argentina arrives at a total of 20,000 to 30,000. See How Many Desaparecidos Were There; Which is the Right Number?, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
161. See Roht-Arriaza & Gibson, supra note 90, at 858.
162. See Herrera v. Argentina, supra note 99.
163. In its report to the Committee Against Torture, the Argentine government agreed that the Inter-American Convention Against the Forced Disappearance of Persons created obligations among States parties to "cooperate with one another in helping to prevent, punish and eliminate the forced disappearance of persons." Third Periodic Reports of States Parties Due in 1996: Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 19 of the Convention: Argentina, U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, addendum, ¶ 7, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/34/Add.5 (1997) (citation omitted). In its final observations on the Argentine report, the Committee stated that Argentina's ratification of the same treaty "establishes obligations, compliance with which will contribute to the prevention and punishment of torture and restitution to the victims." Conclusiones y Recomendaciones del Comite Contra la Tortura: Argentina [Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee Against Torture: Argentina], U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/ARG (1997). Finally, the Committee specifically found that Spain had jurisdiction to proceed against military leaders in Chile and Argentina for the crime of torture. See Alejandro Alevi, Espana es competente en casos de tortura en Chile y Argentina, segun el ONU [Spain Has jurisdiction in Torture Cases in Chile and Argentina, According to the UN), EL MUNDO (Madrid), 23 Nov. 1997, available in Westlaw, ELMUNDO database.
164. In its report to the Committee Against Torture, the Argentine government agreed that the Inter-American Convention Against the Forced Disappearance of Persons created obligations among States parties to "cooperate with one another in helping to prevent, punish and eliminate the forced disappearance of persons." Third Periodic Reports of States Parties Due in 1996: Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 19 of the Convention: Argentina, U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, addendum, ¶ 7, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/34/Add.5 (1997) (citation omitted). In its final observations on the Argentine report, the Committee stated that Argentina's ratification of the same treaty "establishes obligations, compliance with which will contribute to the prevention and punishment of torture and restitution to the victims." Conclusiones y Recomendaciones del Comite Contra la Tortura: Argentina [Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee Against Torture: Argentina], U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/ARG (1997). Finally, the Committee specifically found that Spain had jurisdiction to proceed against military leaders in Chile and Argentina for the crime of torture. See Alejandro Alevi, Espana es competente en casos de tortura en Chile y Argentina, segun el ONU [Spain Has jurisdiction in Torture Cases in Chile and Argentina, According to the UN), EL MUNDO (Madrid), 23 Nov. 1997, available in Westlaw, ELMUNDO database.
165. In its report to the Committee Against Torture, the Argentine government agreed that the Inter-American Convention Against the Forced Disappearance of Persons created obligations among States parties to "cooperate with one another in helping to prevent, punish and eliminate the forced disappearance of persons." Third Periodic Reports of States Parties Due in 1996: Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 19 of the Convention: Argentina, U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, addendum, ¶ 7, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/34/Add.5 (1997) (citation omitted). In its final observations on the Argentine report, the Committee stated that Argentina's ratification of the same treaty "establishes obligations, compliance with which will contribute to the prevention and punishment of torture and restitution to the victims." Conclusiones y Recomendaciones del Comite Contra la Tortura: Argentina [Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee Against Torture: Argentina], U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/ARG (1997). Finally, the Committee specifically found that Spain had jurisdiction to proceed against military leaders in Chile and Argentina for the crime of torture. See Alejandro Alevi, Espana es competente en casos de tortura en Chile y Argentina, segun el ONU [Spain Has jurisdiction in Torture Cases in Chile and Argentina, According to the UN), EL MUNDO (Madrid), 23 Nov. 1997, available in Westlaw, ELMUNDO database.
166. See Roht-Arriaza & Gibson, supra note 90, at 876-77.
167. International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia Since 1991 (Trial Chamber), Prosecutor v. Furundzija, Judgment, Case No. IT-95-17/ 1-T, 10 Dec. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
168. Id. ¶ 153.
169. Id. ¶¶ 155-56 (footnotes omitted). The Furundzija decision has importance not only as to the application of amnesties, but also as an answer to those Law Lords who limited, unnecessarily in my view, the extradition proceedings against General Pinochet to tortures that occurred after Great Britain had ratified the Torture Convention. See infra text accompanying notes 197-98. If torture is a jus cogens violation, which it has been recognized to be for many years, the ratification date of a treaty dealing with torture is irrelevant to the susceptibility of the defendant charged with that crime to prosecution or extradition.
170. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Two.
171. Article 96 of the Spanish Constitution states: "Validly enacted international treaties, once officially published in Spain, shall form part of the internal legal order." C.E. art. 96.
172. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.39/27 (1969), 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, (entered into force 27 Jan. 1980), reprinted in RICHARD B. LILLICH, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS 540.1 (2d ed. 1990). The Audiencia cites to Article "97" of the Vienna Convention. Because there is no such article, one can reasonably conclude the Court was referring to Article 27 of the Convention, which states that "A party may not invoke the provisions of the internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty." Id. art. 27.
173. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.39/27 (1969), 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, (entered into force 27 Jan. 1980), reprinted in RICHARD B. LILLICH, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS 540.1 (2d ed. 1990). The Audiencia cites to Article "97" of the Vienna Convention. Because there is no such article, one can reasonably conclude the Court was referring to Article 27 of the Convention, which states that "A party may not invoke the provisions of the internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty." Id. art. 27.
174. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted 9 Dec. 1948, 78 U.N.T.S. 277, art. 6 (entered into force 12 Jan. 1951) (entered into force for U.S. 23 Feb. 1989), reprinted in BASIC DOCUMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND WORLD ORDER 297 (Burns H. Weston et al. eds., 2nd ed. 1990) [hereinafter Genocide Convention].
175. Id.
176. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Two.
177. Id. Similar conclusions have been reached by legal scholars in the United States. See, e.g., Kenneth C. Randall, Universal Jurisdiction Under International Law, 66 TEX. L. REV. 785, 837 (1988) ("Universal jurisdiction over genocide under customary law can coexist with territoriality jurisdiction under treaty law; the former relates to a jurisdictional right, the latter to a jurisdictional obligation. . . . The parties to the Genocide Convention simply have obligated themselves to prosecute offenses specifically committed within their territory." (footnote omitted)).
178. Código Penal [Criminal Code] [C.P.] art. 137 et seq., Law 44/71,15 Dec. 1971 (cited in Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five).
179. Id.
180. Genocide Convention, supra note 115, art. 2.
181. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five. See C.P. art. 607.
182. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five.
183. The Crime of Genocide, adopted 11 Dec. 1946, G.A. Res. 96 (I), U.N. GAOR, 1 st Sess., 55th plen. mtg., U.N. Doc. A/RES/96 (1948), reprinted in 1 UNITID NATIONS RESOLUTIONS 175 (Dusan J. Djonovich ed., Series I 1973). See Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five.
184. The Crime of Genocide, adopted 11 Dec. 1946, G.A. Res. 96 (I), U.N. GAOR, 1 st Sess., 55th plen. mtg., U.N. Doc. A/RES/96 (1948), reprinted in 1 UNITID NATIONS RESOLUTIONS 175 (Dusan J. Djonovich ed., Series I 1973). See Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five.
185. The Crime of Genocide, adopted 11 Dec. 1946, G.A. Res. 96 (I), U.N. GAOR, 1 st Sess., 55th plen. mtg., U.N. Doc. A/RES/96 (1948), reprinted in 1 UNITID NATIONS RESOLUTIONS 175 (Dusan J. Djonovich ed., Series I 1973). See Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five.
186. See Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five. This usage of the provisions of the international law of crimes against humanity does not, in my view, constitute a statement by the Audiencia that the court was formally alleging crimes against humanity under customary international law, but rather that genocide was a variety of crime against humanity.
187. Id. Interestingly, in its exegesis of the concept of genocide, the Audiencia did not rely on the ideas or legal concepts expressed in the "Whitaker Report," a document relied on heavily both by the private prosecutors and the Investigating Judge in his own ruling upholding his jurisdiction. That report was prepared in August 1985 by Benjamin Whitaker in his role as Special Rapporteur to the U.N. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, on the topic of genocide. In it, Whitaker asserted that there can be cases in which the aggressor and the persecuted can belong to the same group, as in the case of Cambodia where the concept of "auto- genocide" was introduced. The concept was not his own, but that of an earlier report on the issue from Cambodia. Revised and Updated Report on the Question of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Prepared by Mr. B. Whitaker, U.N. ESCOR, Comm'n on Hum. Rts., Sub-Comm'n on Prevention and Protection of Minorities, 38th Sess., Provisional Agenda Item 4, ¶ 31, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/6 & Corr.1 (1985). The report was also cited for its conclusions that the group in question need not be completely destroyed and that even a minority of the group may be sufficient if it is significant, such as its leadership. Id. ¶ 29.
188. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five.
189. See Id. Cherif Bassiouni suggests a similar meaning when, in his treatise on the subject, he suggests that the Convention's meaning of "national group" may be "a group pertaining to a nation" in its territorial sense, as opposed to the common international understanding of "a group of common national origin." 1 INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW 291 (Cherif Bassiouni ed., 1986).
190. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five. The reasoning of the Audiencia follows closely on the reasoning used by Judge Garzón in his prior rulings in the Argentine cases. In his trial court rulings on jurisdiction, Judge Garzón found, in the Argentine case, that groups were targeted on the basis of nationality and religion. As to nationality, those who did not fit the mold of the "Process of National Reorganization," the name given by the regime to its task, interfered with the redefinition of the nation itself. In religious terms, the definition of that group could be grounded in theistic, non-theistic, and atheistic convictions, and all were targeted as part of the non-acceptance of a perverse Christian ideology. See The Criminal Procedures: A Short Summary, supra note 83, at 12-13. The ruling of the Audiencia with regard to the existence of the offense of genocide is, in my view, not as artfully or elegantly articulated in the Chilean appeal as it was in the various and consistent trial court rulings of Judge Garzón, all of which dealt with the Argentine reality. This could have been because his formulation of the argument was more articulate, or perhaps because the Argentine context lent itself more to that particular structure, which the Audiencia seemed to apply as a kind of template to the Chilean context. In her book on the Argentine Dirty War, Marguerite Feitlowitz seems to have captured, perhaps inadvertently, the genocidal intent of the military in their rhetoric of radical nationalism grounded in right-wing Christianity: The generals arrived with a plan, called the Process for National Reorganization, whose language lent grandeur to an otherwise desperate moment. This was a fight not just for Argentina but, the generals stressed, for "Western, Christian civilization." By meeting its "sacred responsibility" to forever rid the earth of "subversion," Argentina "would join the concert of nations." Argentina was the theater for "World War III," which had to be fought against those whose activities - and thoughts - were deemed "subversive." Intellectual, writer, journalist, trade unionist, psychologist, social worker became "categories of guilt." FEITLOWITZ, supra note 24, at 7. Prof. Feitlowitz notes that one of the junta leaders believed that the repression should be "'directed against a minority we do not consider Argentine,'" id. at 24, and that Argentina was seen to be on a quest for recovery of what was called el ser nacional, which she translates as "the collective national essence, soul, or consciousness." Id. at 21. These dark and brooding definitions go a long way toward more firmly placing the genocidal intent toward elimination of a "national group," that being anyone not fitting the generals' definition of "Argentine."
191. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Five. The reasoning of the Audiencia follows closely on the reasoning used by Judge Garzón in his prior rulings in the Argentine cases. In his trial court rulings on jurisdiction, Judge Garzón found, in the Argentine case, that groups were targeted on the basis of nationality and religion. As to nationality, those who did not fit the mold of the "Process of National Reorganization," the name given by the regime to its task, interfered with the redefinition of the nation itself. In religious terms, the definition of that group could be grounded in theistic, non-theistic, and atheistic convictions, and all were targeted as part of the non-acceptance of a perverse Christian ideology. See The Criminal Procedures: A Short Summary, supra note 83, at 12-13. The ruling of the Audiencia with regard to the existence of the offense of genocide is, in my view, not as artfully or elegantly articulated in the Chilean appeal as it was in the various and consistent trial court rulings of Judge Garzón, all of which dealt with the Argentine reality. This could have been because his formulation of the argument was more articulate, or perhaps because the Argentine context lent itself more to that particular structure, which the Audiencia seemed to apply as a kind of template to the Chilean context. In her book on the Argentine Dirty War, Marguerite Feitlowitz seems to have captured, perhaps inadvertently, the genocidal intent of the military in their rhetoric of radical nationalism grounded in right-wing Christianity: The generals arrived with a plan, called the Process for National Reorganization, whose language lent grandeur to an otherwise desperate moment. This was a fight not just for Argentina but, the generals stressed, for "Western, Christian civilization." By meeting its "sacred responsibility" to forever rid the earth of "subversion," Argentina "would join the concert of nations." Argentina was the theater for "World War III," which had to be fought against those whose activities - and thoughts - were deemed "subversive." Intellectual, writer, journalist, trade unionist, psychologist, social worker became "categories of guilt." FEITLOWITZ, supra note 24, at 7. Prof. Feitlowitz notes that one of the junta leaders believed that the repression should be "'directed against a minority we do not consider Argentine,'" id. at 24, and that Argentina was seen to be on a quest for recovery of what was called el ser nacional, which she translates as "the collective national essence, soul, or consciousness." Id. at 21. These dark and brooding definitions go a long way toward more firmly placing the genocidal intent toward elimination of a "national group," that being anyone not fitting the generals' definition of "Argentine."
192. C.P. arts. 571-72. The provisions on the law of terrorism are largely found in Articles 571-580 of the Criminal Code of Spain, but others are scattered about in the criminal law, and are not easily accessible except to the domestic practitioner. In addition to the above sections, General Pinochet is charged under Article 577, which punishes as terrorists even those who are not actual members of the terrorist group or organization but who share the criminal objectives listed in the text above and commit certain listed violent crimes. C.P. art. 577.
193. C.P. art. 515.1. Promoters, directors, leaders, and members of criminal organizations are subject to different levels of punishment depending on their level of responsibility. C.P. art. 516. The penalty is increased if the offender causes injury or if someone dies. C.P. art. 572.
194. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Six.
195. Id.
196. See Auto Judicial, en Madrid, a veinticinco de marzo de mil novecientos noventa y ocho [Judicial Order, in Madrid, the Twenty-Fifth of March of Nineteen Hundred Ninety Eight], at section 13.3, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
197. A treaty that may assist in the effort to extradite Mr. Pinochet from Great Britain to Spain is the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, opened for signature 27 Jan. 1977, Europ. T.S. No. 90 (entered into force 4 Aug. 1978), to which both England and Spain are parties. That treaty requires extradition from one ratifying country to another, on request, for offenses such as kidnaping, "serious unlawful detention," or offenses involving the use of bombs that endanger persons. Id. art 1. The treaty requires that if the sending State does not extradite, it must, "without exception whatsoever and without undue delay," submit the case for prosecution in its own courts. Id. art 7.
198. C.P. art. 174. The crime of torture is condemned in the Spanish Constitution, C.E. art. 15.1, and is codified in the Criminal Code, C.P. arts. 173-177. Spain is a party to both the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted 10 Dec. 1984, G.A. Res. 39/46, U.N. GAOR 39th Sess., Supp. No. 51, U.N. Doc. A/39/51 (1985) (entered into force 26 June 1987), reprinted in 23 I.L.M. 1027 (1984), substantive changes noted in 24 I.L.M. 535 (1985), ratified by Spain on 19 October 1987, and the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and other Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, opened for signature 26 Nov. 1987, Europ. T.S. No. 126 (entered into force 1 Feb. 1989), ratified by Spain on 28 April 1989. Interestingly, the Committee Against Torture, in responding to Spain's third periodic report to the committee, found that the Spanish definition of torture "not only satisfies the definition of Article 1 of the Convention but expands on it in important aspects which provide citizens with stronger protection against those crimes." Observaciones Finales del Comite contra la Tortura: Espana [Final Observations of the Committee against Torture: Spain], U.N. GAOR, Comm. Against Torture, U.N. Doc. CAT/C/SPA (1997).
199. Id.
200. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Seven.
201. Id.
202. See supra Part IV.B.
203. Ruling of the Audiencia Nacional, supra note 83, at Section Eight.
204. U.N. CHARTER art. 2(1), signed 26 June 1945, 59 Stat. 1031, T.S. No. 993, 3 Bevans 1153 (entered into force 24 Oct. 1945), reprinted in BASIC DOCUMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND WORLD ORDER 16 (Burns H. Weston et al. eds., 2d ed. 1990).
205. Ruling of the Audiencia National, supra note 83, at Section Nine.
206. C.E. art. 10.2.
207. See LEYES POLITICAS DEL ESTADO [POLITICAL LAWS OF THE STATE] 37 n.15 (1993).
208. See, e.g., Foundation for the Amplification of the Complaint, supra note 81; Garcés, supra note 11. It should be noted that although these documents make extensive use of the term "crimes against humanity," neither attempts to argue that, as part of customary international law incorporated into domestic law, such crimes might be charged in Spain as crimes per se.
209. See, e.g., The Case of General Pinochet: Universal Jurisdiction and the Absence of Immunity for Crimes Against Humanity, 4 November 1998, available on (visited 14 Nov. 1998).
210. In the International Human Rights Law Clinic's initial lengthy memo on issues of international criminal law, human rights law, and humanitarian law, the use of customary international law was advanced strongly, particularly as to crimes against humanity. See Memorandum from Prof. Richard J. Wilson and Students in the International Human Rights Law Clinic to Gregorio Dionis, 7 Mar. 1997 (on file with author).
211. Second Arrest Order, supra note 2, at Facts, Section One. The Rettig Report is discussed supra text accompanying note 91.
212. THE RETTIG REPORT, supra note 91, at 472.
213. See id.
214. Id. at 472, 474.
215. Id. at 472.
216. Id.
217. Id. at 472-73 (emphasis added). The Rettig Report was not permitted to use names in its text. The president of the junta and of the republic, of course, was Augusto Pinochet.
218. Id. at 473.
219. See id. at 476.
220. Id. at 478.
221. Id. at 477-78.
222. 1 REPORT OF THE CHILEAN NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION 88 (Phillip E. Berryman Irans., 1993).
223. See THE RETTIG REPORT, supra note 91, at 635.
224. Id. at 637.
225. Id. at 638-39.
226. See id. at 638, 640.
227. Id. at 639.
228. Second Arrest Order, supra note 2, at Facts, Section 1.
229. See Keith M. Slack, Operation Condor and Human Rights: A Report from Paraguay's Archive of Terror, 18 HUM. RTS. Q. 492, 493-94 (1996).
230. Fears that the archive might be destroyed, that documents might be stolen, or even that the US Agency for International Development (AID) might take or alter documents, do not seem to be unfounded. Despite initial protests from the Paraguayan government, AID has begun an evaluation process of the documents, and has now sealed off certain military themes from journalists as "only a police matter." See Calloni, supra note 78, at 1, 10.
231. See Datos cuantitativos de los archivos: Los Archivos del Horror de Paraguay [Quantitative Data from the Archives: The Horror Archives of Paraguay], 8 Aug. 1998, available on (visited 3 Aug. 1999).
232. Calloni, supra note 78, at 7. Another writer on the Archive identifies a letter from Contreras to a Paraguayan police official, Francisco Britez Borges, inviting him to a conference in Chile that was to be kept strictly secret, and that was intended to "be the basis for an excellent coordination and improved action on behalf of the National Security of our respective countries." Slack, supra note 167, at 501 (footnote omitted). See also Esteban Cuya, La "Operacion Condor": El Terrorisme de Estado de Alcance Transnacional [Operation Condor: State Terrorism of International Dimensions], KOĀǦA RON̄ÉĚTĀ, Dec. 1993, at 6-7, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
233. The document in which this information appears is available as photographed text on the website of the National Security Archive, a library research center in Washington, D.C. that specializes in declassification of documents. The website for this document is (visited 17 June 1999).
234. Scott Armstrong & Saul Landau, Pinochet: Is a Terrorist Hiding in Chile's Senate?, L.A. TIMES, 17 May 1998, at M2.
235. Calloni, supra note 78, at 8. In her article on Operation Condor, Stella Calloni suggests that the CIA did more than facilitate meetings or escapes. The Technical Services division of the CIA provided electric-shock torture equipment to the Brazilians and the Uruguayans and offered information as to how much charge the human body could sustain. At the Office of Public Security (OPS) installation in Texas, CIA agents trained Latin American security agents in the manufacture of bombs. See id. at 4.
236. From the website of the National Security Archive, (visited 17 June 1999).
237. Chile: Arrest of Suspected Assassin in 22-year-old Murder Case Brings New Demands for Gen. Augusto Pinochet to Resign, NOTISUR-LATIN AMERICAN POLITICAL AFFAIRS, 26 Jan. 1996, available in Westlaw, NSLAMPA database.
238. See Armstrong & Landau, supra note 172.
239. See Foundation for the Amplification of the Complaint, supra note 81, at Facts, Section 12.
240. See Nathaniel C. Cash, Spy Case Fuels Uruguay-Chile Crisis: Network Also Heightens Tension Between Authorities, HOUSTON CHRONICLE, 25 July 1993, at 24.
241. See id.
242. See South American Suspects Disappearing Before Trials, ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 1 Aug. 1993, at 7B; Katherine Ellison, South American State Terrorists Protecting Each Other, LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 17 July 1993, at 14B.
243. See South American Suspects Disappearing Before Trials, ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 1 Aug. 1993, at 7B; Katherine Ellison, South American State Terrorists Protecting Each Other, LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 17 July 1993, at 14B.
244. Gustavo Gonzalez, Chile: Army Denies Involvement in Prats Murder, INTER PRESS SERVICE, 24 Jan. 1996, available in LEXIS, World Library, INPRES file.
245. Second Arrest Order, supra note 2.
246. Auto Pidiendo Extradicion de Pinochet [Order Seeking Extradition of Pinochet], Madrid, 3 Nov. 1998, available on (visited 17 June 1999).
247. Second Arrest Order, supra note 2, at Facts, Section 3.1.
248. See Foundation for the Amplification of the Complaint, supra note 81, at Facts, Section 1.
249. Id. at Facts, Section 3.
250. Id.
251. Id. at Facts, Section 3(e)(1).
252. Id. at Facts, Section 3(e)(2).
253. Id. at Facts, Section 4.
254. Id at Facts, Section 11.
255. Id. at Facts, Section 11, ¶ 59.
256. Id. at Facts, Section 11, ¶ 60.
257. Id. at Facts, Section 11, ¶ 148.
258. Id. at Facts, Section 11, ¶¶ 260-61.
259. Pinochet (No. 3), supra note 2, at 98.
260. Id.
261. Id. at 115, 153, 170.
262. Id. at 145 (emphasis added).
263. On the day after the Lords' decision, and pursuant to the request of the Crown Prosecutor Service (CPS) for additional evidence, Judge Garzón provided evidence of an additional 33 cases of torture occurring between 29 September 1988 and 11 March 1990. Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés on 26 March 1999 (on file with author) [hereinafter Order of 33 Cases]. The use of the earlier date of 29 September 1988 seems to arise from the context of the CPS request, which included both the September and December dates, probably due to a lack of clarity in the Lords' decision. See also Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés on 29 March 1999 (in which Judge Garzón ordered that all relevant evidence be provided to the CPS, pursuant to their request) (on file with the author). The CPS request was grounded in Article 13 of the European Convention on Extradition of 1957, which requires England to request "the necessary supplementary information" "[i]f the information communicated by the requesting party [here, Spain] is found to be insufficient to allow the requested Party [here, England] to make a decision" regarding extradition. European Convention on Extradition, opened for signature 13 Dec. 1957, art. 13, Europ. T.S. No. 24 (entered into force 18 Apr. 1960), reprinted in HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE: INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS 621, 626 (Christopher Cane & Mark Mackarel eds., 1997).
264. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
265. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
266. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
267. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
268. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
269. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
270. See Order of 33 Cases, supra note 200; Auto [Order], Madrid, 26 Mar. 1999 (nine new cases of torture between 27 October 1988 and 28 August 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 5 Apr. 1999 (eleven new cases of torture, all in 1989); Auto [Order], Madrid, 27 Apr. 1999 (twelve new cases after 27 September 1988); Auto [Order], Madrid, 30 Apr. 1999 (summarizing the prior orders and adding an additional eight cases) [hereinafter Order of 30 Apr. 1999], all received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, respectively, on 26 March 1999, 29 March 1999, 14 April 1999, 29 April 1999, and 4 June 1999 (all on file with author). Notably, the Chief Prosecutor of the Audiencia finally formulated a challenge to Judge Garzón's actions when the Judge filed his Order of 27 Apr. 1999. In a preliminary and later final order, Judge Garzón roundly rejected the Prosecutor's challenge as untimely and without merit, in that the court was responding to a specific and legally appropriate request from the CPS. See Auto [Order], Madrid, 4 May 1999; Auto [Order], Madrid, 17 May 1999, received by electronic mail from Juan Garcés, on 6 May 1999 and 17 May 1999, respectively.
271. See especially Order of 30 Apr. 1999, supra note 201, at Sections 4-6 of Razonamientos Jurídicos [Juridical Reasoning].
272. David Graves, Pinochet Will Face 36 New Charges, DAILY TELEGRAPH (London), 5 June 1999.
273. Date Set for Pinochet Extradition Proceedings, GUARDIAN (Manchester), 4 June 1999.