|  ElCiudadano.cl |  Noticias

El Ciudadano

Original article: Abogado de Mauricio Hernández Norambuena denuncia traslado «arbitrario» a recinto de máxima seguridad

Mauricio Menares stated that there are no grounds justifying the change in Hernández Norambuena’s prison regime. He also recalled that prior reports had ruled out his stay in that facility. 

In a recent episode of Sentido Común, Javier Pineda interviewed Mauricio Menares Hernández, the nephew and lawyer of Mauricio Hernández Norambuena (known as Comandante Ramiro), who conducted a thorough review of the judicial case of one of the main leaders of the Front Patriotic Manuel Rodríguez.

The interview began with Menares explaining the context of Hernández Norambuena’s arrest. He pointed out that Hernández was detained in 1993 and subsequently sentenced the following year for two offenses: first, as the material author of the assassination of Jaime Guzmán, and second, for the kidnapping of Cristián Edwards, both resulting in life imprisonment. 

Menares noted that an unusual detail regarding this sentence was that it was delivered by visiting judge Alfredo Pfeiffer, who was known for his ties to the Chilean far-right and who—as per Menares—created hatred and resentment towards the militants of the Front Patriotic Manuel Rodríguez. 

According to Menares, the trial against Hernández cannot be viewed as an ordinary process. He argues that it was conducted by a visiting judge and that the convictions relied on special laws, which he claims were designed to target political dissent. Furthermore, both crimes were classified as terrorist acts, which resulted in the application of Anti-Terrorism Law and a judicial process with fewer guarantees for the defendants.

On another note, Menares explained that after escaping from the High-Security Prison in 1996, Hernández Norambuena remained a fugitive until 2002, when he was arrested in Brazil for the kidnapping of businessman Washington Olivetto.

Menares stated that initially, the Brazilian justice system recognized a political motive behind the crime and sentenced him to 17 years in prison. However, higher courts revoked this decision and increased the sentence to the maximum allowed by Brazilian law at the time, which was 30 years. 

He also mentioned that as soon as Hernández’s arrest in Brazil became known, Chile requested his extradition to serve the remaining sentences for the cases of Jaime Guzmán and Cristián Edwards. Consequently, Hernández Norambuena was subjected simultaneously to a Brazilian criminal process and preventive detention for extradition purposes.

Although Brazil agreed to extradite him, it conditioned this on Chile adjusting the life sentences to a maximum of 30 years, in accordance with the limitations set by the Brazilian Constitution. According to Menares, the Chilean state’s refusal to make this modification caused delays in the process for years, while Hernández Norambuena remained imprisoned in Brazil under strict isolation conditions.

Regarding the classification by the Inter-American Human Rights Commission, Menares stated that it recently acknowledged that Brazil, when implementing the isolation regime on Mauricio Hernández, violated multiple human rights, such as physical and psychological integrity, the principle of legality, the non-retroactivity of the law, and various guarantees enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights.

Furthermore, he explained that for 17 years, attempts were made to commute Hernández Norambuena’s sentences without success, a situation that changed when Brazil began offering the possibility of prison benefits after a judge removed him from isolation, concluding that he no longer represented a real threat. 

According to Menares, upon learning of this development, Chile expedited the proceedings and reached an agreement with the Brazilian government for an expedited extradition in 2019. As part of this deal, Chile made two main commitments: to replace the life sentences with a maximum penalty of 30 years and to recognize the time Hernández Norambuena had spent in custody in Brazil to count towards his sentence in Chile.

The implementation of these commitments was entrusted to then visiting judge Mario Carroza. Menares indicated that Carroza fulfilled the first part by commuting the two life sentences to two 15-year sentences. However, he claimed that Carroza violated the second commitment by rejecting to acknowledge the nearly three and a half years of imprisonment that, according to Brazil, should be credited to the sentence.

For Menares, this decision contradicted international agreements signed by both countries and relied on a “ridiculous” argument: that recognizing that time would validate the existence of two simultaneous preventive detentions. According to the lawyer, that situation indeed occurred and was precisely a violation of rights that should have been taken into account when calculating the penalty.

It is worth noting that when Mario Carroza was in charge of the case, Luis Hermosilla acted as the lawyer for Jaime Guzmán’s family. In this context, Menares alleged that there are suspicions of potential irregularities in the investigation into the former senator’s assassination.

He indicated that following revelations from the so-called Hermosilla case, new evidence regarding the relationship between lawyer Hermosilla and then-judge Mario Carroza, who presided over the trial that resulted in the conviction of Mauricio Hernández Norambuena, began to surface.

In this context, it was noted that a complaint was filed against Carroza, Hermosilla, and Santiago Appeals Court judge Guillermo de la Barra. The lawyer stated that there are messages indicating a close relationship and coordination between Carroza and Hermosilla, including conversations that, according to press reports, addressed the case of Guzmán’s murder. In Menares’ view, this evidence could suggest crimes such as bribery, misconduct, or disclosure of secrets.

Concerning the investigation, he noted that the complaint was filed a few months ago, but he criticized the initial lack of action from the Prosecutor’s Office, stating that the case was assigned to a local office without relevant developments. He added that following a report about the lack of progress, the Public Ministry resumed contact to evaluate new measures, including adding Hermosilla’s messages to the case, which are already in the hands of investigators.

Additionally, when asked about Hernández Norambuena’s prison situation, the lawyer stated that after his extradition to Chile, he was placed in a maximum-security regime at the Special High-Security Unit, where he remained until 2021. Subsequently, he was transferred with other inmates to the Rancagua prison due to renovations, where he lived under relatively ordinary conditions for several years. 

Recently, however, Menares reported that Hernández Norambuena was transferred again to the High-Security Special Prison (Repas) without prior notice and without any disciplinary infractions. The lawyer deemed the measure arbitrary and stated that it entails much stricter conditions, with restrictions on visits, lesser access to rights, and greater control measures.

Menares questioned why this transfer affected only Mauricio Hernández and recalled that the Human Rights Department of Gendarmería had stated earlier that Repas is designated for inmates who are highly problematic or linked to organized crime—characteristics that, in his view, do not apply to the former militant.

Regarding the next steps, Menares shared that Hernández’s family has undertaken an administrative effort to understand the reason for the transfer. They have also filed an appeal before the guaranteeing judge: “This is currently being addressed by the seventh guaranteeing court in Santiago, which has requested Gendarmería de Chile to explain the transfer and indicate the possibilities for returning to Rancagua. Once that report is received, a hearing will be scheduled,” he stated. 

Moreover, a request has been made to the Human Rights Department of Gendarmería for a new visit to produce a report concerning Hernández Norambuena, which they hope will indicate that he should not be in that facility. 

Finally, the lawyer mentioned that a protest has already taken place at Gendarmería in Valparaíso, with more gatherings planned in the capital soon.

Next, you can watch the full episode of Sentido Común:

La entrada Mauricio Hernández Norambuena’s Lawyer Claims ‘Arbitrary’ Transfer to High-Security Prison se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.