“I believe that there were no systematic violations of human rights.” After saying this phrase on the Tolerancia Cero program, Consuelo Contreras ruled out that there was a “turn” regarding what the INDH considered in 2019 on this matter.
The director of the INDH, Consuelo Contreras, He denied that there had been any change by the organization regarding the human rights violations committed during the social outbreak.
The social worker caused controversy when she pointed out on the Zero Tolerance program that these violations were not systematic in nature.
“I believe that there were no systematic violations of human rights, because for systematicity to occur there must be an agreement between different organs of the State”said Contreras, but he did say that these events were “generalized.”
This position is similar to that put forward by the former director of the National Institute of Human Rights, Sergio Micco, who ended up leaving office after receiving various criticisms for not considering systematicity.
In the same program, Contreras stated that Micco “He said or says that (human rights violations) are not systematic or widespread. I believe that they are not systematic, but there should be an investigation into whether there are patterns.”
Contreras rules out “turn” by INDH
Through a letter sent to El Mercurio, the director of the INDH assured that her statements “In no case does this mean that there were no serious and massive human rights violations, as unanimously described by the INDH Council in 2019.”
“It also does not mean that these violations cannot constitute crimes against humanity,” he added. Following the latter, he explained that the Rome Statute indicates that a crime against humanity is committed when it is systematic or widespread. “Both should not occur in a copulative manner”said Contreras.
“Although the INDH Council in 2022 established that, up to that point, there were insufficient elements to file a complaint for crimes against humanity, that qualification is now a task for the justice system,” he added.
Finally, denied a “turn” by the National Institute of Human Rights in this matter.
