27 February 2026. The concept was used in the early 2000s by the Chilean Supreme Court to reduce sentences and foster impunity, at a time when some judges backed Pinochet. The recent decision is in application of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling of 12 March 2024, in favour of the victims of the Pinochet dictatorship in Vega González et al. v. Chile.
For decades, family members organised in groups (Families of the Detained and Disappeared, Group of Families of Politically Executed Persons, and Group of Families of Detainees of Parral), fought for justice, but in numerous instances, once the case reached the Supreme Court of Chile, the court would apply the half of the prescriptive period, allowing agents of the State convicted of extrajudicial executions and forced disappearances to receive disproportionately light sentences or to go free and thereby exacerbating the suffering of the victims and their families.
Victims and their representatives reacted to this situation by petitioning the Inter-American system. In September 2024, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) ruled against the State of Chile for application of the nonconventional sentencing rule based on elapsed time of the statute of limitations and ordered it to review and/or annul the reduced sentences handed down in 14 criminal proceedings for crimes against humanity. IACHR reaffirmed that sentencing conditions that mitigate the responsibility of the perpetrators of crimes against humanity are not allowed. The Court declared that the sentencing rule consolidated a form of impunity incompatible with the international obligations of the State of Chile regarding the investigation, prosecution, and punishment of serious human rights violations.
As a direct result of the international court’s ruling, the Chilean Supreme Court overturned the reduced sentences handed down in application of the sentencing rule and imposed new sentences commensurate with the gravity of the crimes. The decision is a milestone in the fight against impunity in Chile and establishes a decisive precedent in guaranteeing the right to justice for victims and their families, recognizing that there can be no lenient punishments for crimes against humanity.
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), in collaboration with lawyers Karina Fernández and Magdalena Garcés, assisted and represented the families of persons detained, disappeared, and executed during the Chilean dictatorship over the span of several decades. The case, which represents a turning point in ending impunity in Chile, illustrates the important role that strategic litigation has in strengthening accountability standards for crimes against humanity in the region and globally.