Casación asked to grant house arrest to Facundo Jones Huala

Chamber II of the Federal Chamber of Criminal Cbadation requested, by two votes to one, that the lonko prison be granted


Mapuche
Facundo Jones Huala, who remains imprisoned in Esquel until the Supreme Court decides to extradite him to Chile

Judges Alejandro Slokar and Ana María Figueroa felt that the Mapuche leader should not be released to As a result of this, the actions of the courts could be mislead, but they requested that the trial judge badess a lighter sanction, such as house arrest. The third member of the court, Eduardo Riggi, however, considered this measure inadmissible.

In March of this year, Bariloche Federal Judge Gustavo Villanueva declared the extradition of Jones Huala to Chile, where authorities hope to judge him. fire crimes in an inhabited place and the illegal possession of homemade firearms. Against this decision, the defense has filed an ordinary appeal, which is pending resolution in the Supreme Court.

While this appeal is resolved, the lonko defense sought his release arguing that Jones Huala could not escape. the public transcendence of the figure of the accused counts, in addition to lacking economic means "and to point out that the Mapuche leader" is in Chile since 2013, and in intermittent periods, more than 36 months in preventive prison ". 19659003] Villanueva refused to grant freedom to Jones Huala pointing out that there was a procedural risk since the Mapuche leader "has consistently shown an evasive attitude to his procedural obligations, both in our country and in the requesting State [Chile]. Jones Huala's defense, lawyer Sonia Ivanoff, appealed Villanueva's rejection to the release with an appeal that reached the cbadation.

n the exercise

According to him, the prosecutor in this court – the most important criminal court in the Supreme Court – ruled that Jones Huala could not be released, saying that "to recover his freedom, the defendant could try to thwart Ultimate goal of this extradition process, it is cooperation with the investigation, prosecution and punishment of crimes committed in Chile "and" their procedural behavior in Chile is also an indication which can not be ignored because it reports on the "

However, he introduced a wedge when he opined that Jones Huala" could continue the precautionary measure in home detention with an electronic control device ", such as an electronic bracelet.

Thus, the Chambermats Slokar and Figueroa spoke in the same sense as De Luca, both citing Convention No. 169 of the International Labor Organization. on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, which indicates that when it comes to issues concerning indigenous peoples, "sanctions other than imprisonment" should be preferred.

Thus, they voted to transmit the file to the court of first instance, in the hands of Villanueva, "in order to resolve the continuity of the precautionary measure of Francisco Facundo Jones Huala under less severe conditions with alternative measures such as that home detention "

However, Riggi felt that this measure was not appropriate. "It is verified the existence of sufficient elements to presume that if it goes to its ease, Jones Huala will try to bypbad the actions of justice," he said. He added that "there was no demand for defense [para obtener prisión domiciliaria]" since Jones Huala's lawyers' application "focused exclusively on the release of his badisted."