Соответствующая норма
Chile
Practice Relating to Rule 99. Deprivation of Liberty
In its judgment in the Contreras Sepúlveda case in 2004, Chile’s Supreme Court stated that “the irregular detention of civilians may not be considered to fall within the competence of the military”.
Chile, Supreme Court, Second Chamber, Contreras Sepúlveda case, Case No. 2182-98, Judgment of 17 November 2004, § 26.
In 2000, during the consideration of the fourth periodic report of Chile before the Human Rights Committee, a representative of Chile stated that “on July 1, 1998, Law No. 19,567 … [has] been enacted, … abolishing detention on suspicion”.
Chile, Statement by the delegation of Chile before the Human Rights Committee during the consideration of the fourth periodic report of Chile, 3 March 2000, UN Doc. CAT/C/SR.1733, § 26.
In 2002, in its third periodic report to the Committee against Torture, Chile stated:
The new Code [of Criminal Procedure] contains substantial changes in order to guarantee the protection of the detainee … Among these changes reference may be made to:
(a) Recognition of various rights of the accused as from the first act in the procedure against him: the right of the detainee to be informed of the reason for his detention and of his other rights.
Chile, Third periodic report of Chile to the Committee against Torture, 28 October 2002, UN Doc. CAT/C/39/Add.14, submitted 18 February 2002, § 32(a); see also § 34.
In 2006, in its fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Chile stated: “Accused persons who have been deprived of their liberty also have the following rights: to be notified of the ground for their detention”.
Chile, Fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 5 July 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CHL/5, submitted 7 February 2006, § 155.
(footnote in original omitted)In its judgment in the Contreras Sepúlveda case in 2004, Chile’s Supreme Court stated:
If the authorities detain a person, they must notify the competent judge and place the detainee at the judge’s discretion. This underlines the fact that there is no legal basis whatsoever for detaining persons and taking them to secret detention centres.
Chile, Supreme Court, Second Chamber, Contreras Sepúlveda case, Case No. 2182-98, Judgment of 17 November 2004, § 24.
In 2006, in its fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Chile stated: “Accused persons who have been deprived of their liberty also have the following rights: … to be brought promptly before the court that ordered the arrest or detention”.
Chile, Fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 5 July 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CHL/5, submitted 7 February 2006, § 155.
(footnote in original omitted)In 2006, in its fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Chile stated: “Accused persons who have been deprived of their liberty also have the following rights: … to be brought promptly before the court that ordered the arrest or detention”.
Chile, Fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 5 July 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/CHL/5, submitted 7 February 2006, § 155.
(footnote in original omitted) 