Chile 
prides itself for being a very legalistic country. At the same time, the general 
perception is that together with Public Health and Education, the Judicial 
system is, to put it mildly, a shambles.
 Legalistic in Chile has two facets. One is that it 
is a very litigious country, possibly even more than the USA, and the other is the mere 
adherence to the letter of procedure rather than the spirit or fair outcome of 
any legal process. Possibly the best example of the latter are the secret laws 
of the military government. During the Pinochet years, the Junta, which combined 
Executive and Legislative powers, enacted a number of laws which were not 
publicised. Amazingly, after nearly 20 years of what passes as “democratic” 
government, not only are the 150 or so such texts still valid in principle, but 
they are still secret. Some of them did leak out and they consider no less than 
the death penalty for doing some things that you were not even aware were 
prohibited (obviously, because the laws were 
secret).
How could the secrecy be combined with a travesty of 
legality? Easy, and an excellent example of distorted legalese. Under Chilean 
principles of Public Law, the final stage of a piece of legislation is its 
publication in the state gazette, the Diario Oficial. Thus, the text was 
published in that gazette of which a sole single copy was printed and filed. The 
procedure was thus respected but nobody could have access to its 
content.
Another feature of Chilean law is that the legislative 
process is extremely undemocratic. Though the Executive and parliamentarians can 
propose laws like elsewhere, not only is the process very tortuous in order to 
avoid or delay as much as possible anything that would upset the current cosy 
apple cart, but even after that obstacle is crossed, if at all, the trials and 
tribulations are not finished.
There are two further institutions, whose unelected 
members mainly consist of individuals with dubious political and religious 
backgrounds. One is the Constitutional Tribunal, and the other the Comptroller 
General of the Republic. Whereas in other countries such or similar institutions 
exist only in order to give a ruling on extreme cases and situations, in Chile 
they have become a common additional step of the legislative process, acting 
according to their hang-ups and allegiances rather than in the spirit of common 
law and justice. A recent example of that is the ruling on the distribution of 
the morning-after contraceptive pill, which both organisations (heavily devoted, 
particularly the Comptroller General, to the Opus Dei) banned the state from 
handing out to people of limited means, whilst leaving untouched the possibility 
of the upper-class trainee tarts of the barrio alto to buy it expensively 
over-the-counter at any chemist’s. Talking of chemists, one of the chains 
recently shown up as having participated in a price-fixing cartel has now taken 
the matter up to the Constitutional Tribunal, in protest against one of its 
former partners in crime who agreed to cooperate with the courts. What the fuck 
this has to do with a Constitutional matter beggars 
belief.
Such corruption of the mind is of course widely 
accompanied by corruption in kind, examples of which abound despite efforts to 
black them out, and whose perpetrators are rarely punished. 
To the extent that the first comprehensive code of 
justice that came to us is the table of Hamurabi which is kept at Paris’ Louvre 
museum, I thought it might be worthwhile comparing what the King of Mesopotamia 
thought of thousands of years ago, with the reality of “modern” Chilean justice. 
For this exercise, I am heavily 
indebted to an article by Frank Holt, professor of history at 
Houston 
University, who 
stimulatingly described the Hamurabi principles in an article published in the 
May/June 2009 issue of Saudi Aramco World magazine. You may find the full 
article at www.saudiaramcoworld.com/.../i.pillar.of.justice.htm.
I have another reason to take Mesopotamian legal history 
as a basis for comparison, beyond its pioneering status. For over two centuries, 
from the time my paternal grandmother’s family crossed the water from Persia to 
Iraq in 1763, joined in the late 1880’s by my grandfather and his brother who 
came from Turkey and bought most of what is now the land in and around Fallujah, 
my family lived in the land of Mesopotamia. If to that I add my own strong 
belief in truth and justice, there is no need to be a lawyer to write about the 
law.
ABOUT HAMURABI’S 
WORK  King Hamurabi was an Amorite, 
a Semitic tribe originating like all Semites in the Arabian peninsula, who moved West and settled 
in Mesopotamia around 1900 BC. 
Their capital was Babylon, and 
in 1792 BC Hamurabi became king, starting a reign of 42 years. Though best 
remembered in the public eye for his legal code, he was a major diplomat and 
empire builder, among a people who greatly advanced sciences such as Astronomy 
and Mathematics.
The code of Hamurabi is believed to have come into being 
towards the end of his long reign, and is inscribed in 3800 lines of cuneiform 
writing on a 2.25 metre-high black basalt rock, which was broken in two by the 
time it was found in the early years of the XXth century by French archaeologist 
Jacques de Morgan and his team.
The actual legal body of the text describes some 282 
litigious situations and rulings (dinat sharim), and the final section has a 
warning of terrible consequences against anyone defacing the stone, or “corrupt 
its words in any way”, even if the perpetrator was another 
king.
NOT ALWAYS AN EYE FOR AN 
EYE  The best known facet of the 
Hamurabi Code is the symmetrical punishment of “an eye for an eye” etc..In fact, 
it was not a uniform principle. Like in Chile, different layers of society were 
treated differently when it came to applying the law. However, unlike 
Chile, this was clearly set out 
from the start, without any pretence at the universality of the 
law.
Mesopotamian society was divided into three distinct 
classes, membership of which could affect the “remedy” doted out by the judges. 
The upper class were the “awilum”, followed by the  subordinate but 
free class (the “mushkenum”). At the bottom of the ladder were the slaves or 
“wardum”. 
If the crime was committed within a given status class, then the 
symmetrical punishment applied. However, if the victim was of a lower class than 
the perpetrator, then the severe consequence would be replaced by a simple fine 
(if the victim was a slave, the fine was collected by its owner). In 
Chile , the lower classes are 
lucky if they can get as far as a court at all, and if they do, their 
incompetent or legal aid-appointed lawyer cannot compete with the strength and 
bribing power of the upper classes.
That is why of course a notorious paedophile and scoundrel in 
Chile can get away, literally 
with murder (and even in another case, be promoted to high public office). For 
the same unjust rulings, keepers of insalubrious animal homes and kennels where 
pets were held in unspeakable conditions do not even get fined, but a lady went 
to jail last week for keeping two cats in her apartment against the building’s 
regulations, and refusing to pay the resulting fine. An interesting aspect of 
Hamurabi legislation is about medical malpractice. Doctors were allowed to 
charge more to the richer patients (nothing wrong with that), but they had to 
give them their monies’ worth, as a botched operation on an “awilum” could 
result in a severed hand. In Chile, you have to be rich and powerful to win a medical malpractice case 
against a self-protecting medical profession where there is not even a 
collegiate association or register with compulsory 
membership.
Shoddy builders were punished under Hamurabi codes in a very 
straightforward fashion. If a defectively build construction collapses and kills 
the son of the owner, it is the son of the builder who is killed. In 
Chile, it takes years of 
expensive litigation (at the victim family’s expenses) to generally get nowhere. 
The death of the eldest son is interestingly one of the main consequences of the 
Armenian Curse, a phenomenon brought to my attention by an Australian friend, 
and I assure you in most cases it is pretty successful. 
FALSE 
TESTIMONY   There is one essential 
aspect of Hamurabi’s Code, which is also part of the Ten Commandments (actually 
the Ninth), and that applies to false testimony (“Thou shall not bear false 
testimony against thy neighbour”). Though laws against perjury might exist in 
Chilean codes, my experience is that anybody can accuse anyone of anything and 
set out a legal process for which the onus of innocence is on the accused rather 
than the proof on the accuser. Remember the story of the battered wife of 
general Lucar, who had to fight 12 years in the courts to ascertain her 
accusation and get rid of a counter-accusation by her husband for “an insult to 
his dignity”. I wrote about the case in a recent Monthly Defence Review. 
False testimony, until a few years ago, was actually 
institutionalized in Chile. This 
was in relation with the civil annulment of a marriage, at the time when there 
was no divorce law. The only way to legally have your marriage 
declared null and void was to “prove” that the original marriage papers were 
incorrectly drawn. You therefore brought witnesses in who swore that at the time 
of obtaining the licence you actually lived at another address than the one you 
declared. Not only the divorcing parties, but the lawyers and the judges were 
all aware of the travesty and went along with it.
Nowadays, I have learnt the hard way that the very 
“neighbour” God mentions through Moses can put in totally preposterous 
accusations against you and they are received without batting an eyelid by the 
police and the procurator-fiscal, without a second’s thought about its veracity. 
Hamurabi was pretty drastic about such behaviour. If..anyone fails to prove his 
case, then that accuser shall be put to death”. As simple as that.. 
Further down that section (which is one of the first ones to be 
addressed in the Code), it is specified that any judge whose incompetence leads 
to a wrong decision is removed from the bench. In Chile they are promoted to the Supreme Court 
or Constitutional Tribunal, where they pontificate towards even larger 
iniquitous cock-ups.
CIVIL LAW  Contrary to Chile, Hamurabic legislation made divorce easy, but also contrary to 
Chile, it was much stricter in 
codifying and applying aspects pertaining to the division of property and the 
welfare of small children. We know that to be able to receive alimony payments, 
even under court orders, is an ordeal for most ex-spouses in Chile.
 To the extent that it was a polygamous 
society, it was more progressive than the Islamic principles that came into 
force some three thousand years later. You could not just get rid of a wife like 
that on acquiring a new one, particularly if she was ill. The protection even 
applied to slaves with whom the master had children. They could not be 
sold.
There is also plenty of coverage of financial arrangements, including 
non-responsibility for debts incurred by partners of a previous marriage . In 
Chile, you have to fight for 
years in order not to pay consumer debts incurred by the previous tenants living 
at your address.
TRIAL BY 
ORDEAL   This attempt to leave to 
the Gods rather than to a jury the burden of ascertain guilt was taken up by the 
Inquisition department of the Catholic Church and civilian courts as well, and 
survived well into the Renaissance period. In Hamurabi’s Mesopotamia, if no concrete proof of a crime 
was not available, and they were strong presumptions, the suspect was thrown 
into a river, and if they could reach the other side without drowning, they were 
deemed innocent.
Though people were last thrown in rivers during the Chilean military 
government, thy were already dead by that time, so it was not exactly a way of 
establishing guilt or innocence. However, taking up or defending yourself in any 
court case in Chile is another 
type of ordeal. It is an ordeal of patience, because it takes years. It is an 
ordeal of money, because it costs a fortune, and it is an ordeal of immorality, 
because of the incompetence, partiality and corruption involved. 
ELECTORAL 
IRREGULARITIES   This last section 
has little to do with Hamurabi because there were no elections to speak of in 
his time. I would like to refer to the hysteria regarding the Iranian election 
results, and would like to ask on what grounds do foreigners sitting thousands 
of miles away have concluded that there was “massive fraud”? What are the 
sources? The protesters from the losing side (whose candidate by the way had a 
beautiful campaign song with a melody taken from an old Armenian song, Sirun 
Sari Yar “Beautiful Mountain Love”). The protests are huge? Well, 37 % of a big 
population is a lot of people, and life in Iran is hard. The accusations? Not enough 
voting bulletins in some polling offices (par for the course in many developing 
countries). Paying money for votes (ditto, Chilean candidates in recent years 
have been distributing bags of food and paying utility bills in their election 
districts. What is the difference?). Pressure on voters (Yeah, that is a good 
one, with several Chilean corporations regularly threatening their staff with 
dismissal if they did not vote for the bosse’s choice). Ubiquense! 
 HUEVADA DE LA SEMANA   
 This week’s Huevada is almost tailor-made for the subject 
matter treated above. A long-established foreign businessman in Chile was moving out of a parked position in 
front of a bank branch. Unwittingly, he hit the mechanism that operates the 
entrance shutters (it was after closing time), hardly noticing anything apart 
from a slight bump he did not pay much attention to.
Fast forward to a few months later, when he attempts to 
leave the country on a business trip. He is arrested at the border for “evading 
justice”. That is the first time he heard that he had a legal case against him. 
The bank’s security camera recorded the incident and identified him through his 
number plate. At no time did the bank, its lawyers, the police or any court make 
any attempt to contact him. A court case obviously took place in abstentia, and 
he was ordered to be arrested, unbeknown to him (this is the “developed country 
which is applying to join the OECD). He had to spend some time in jail until his 
lawyer bailed him out. The bank was approached and an indemnisation settlement 
agreed upon and paid.
End of the matter, you might think. You would be wrong. When he next 
attempts to leave Chile, he is 
detained again and informed that as the matter “is still outstanding” (it was 
not), he was having his wrongly-named “indefinite” resident status cancelled. He 
could of course appeal, (“we are a legalistic country, you know”) but during the 
six months it takes for the appeal to be considered, he cannot leave the country 
(not very practical when you are a busy foreign 
businessman).
No comments:
Post a Comment