Highlights
- Former Pinochet agent Adriana Rivas presented her appeal against extradition to the full bench of the Federal Court.
- In Chile, she’s accused of being involved in the disappearance of seven people during the 1970s.
- She presented 17 grounds for appeal and requested the elimination of a previous order from Federal Justice Wendy Abraham.
The full bench, formed by three judges from the Federal Court of New South Wales, heard the appeal of the former Pinochet-era secret police agent, Adriana Rivas, who argued against her extradition to Chile, where she is wanted for the disappearance of seven regime dissidents in the 1970s.
Justices Debra Mortimer, Robert Bromwich and Stewart Anderson heard allegations for and against Rivas' extradition on Thursday, while a small crowd of supporters of the victims in Chile eagerly watched the proceedings outside the court in Sydney's CBD.
The former National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) agent turned nanny, initiated the fresh appeal after having lost a previous effort in the Federal Court in June, where she sought to overturn the decision of the .
Rivas presented 17 grounds for appeal and requests the elimination of a previous order from Federal Justice Wendy Abraham, who in June .
Chilean migrants watch proceedings outside of the court. Source: SBS Spanish/Esther Lozano
Rivas, 68, has been behind bars since her arrest in Sydney in 2019.
She is accused in Chile of having worked as part of the Laurato Brigade, an 'elite squadron' that operated at the Simón Bolívar barracks, considered an extermination and torture facility.
Among the disappeared people linked to her case was Víctor Díaz, Secretary-General of the Communist Party in Chile, who disappeared in 1976.
Rivas denies all the charges against her. Her defence claims that although Rivas worked at the barracks under the DINA secret police Director, Manuel Contreras, General Pinochet's second in charge, she was unaware of the activities that took place in those facilities.
If confirmed, the charges laid against Rivas in Chile are considered crimes against humanity.
On Thursday, Rivas' lawyer, Frank Santisi, told the court that Australian magistrates did not consider that the Amnesty Law, enacted in Chile during the Pinochet regime in 1978 to shield those suspected of committing human rights violations, "exists in Chile and there is no act in Parliament to remove it".
Adriana Rivas during an interview with SBS Spanish reporter Florencia Melgar in 2013. Source: SBS Spanish
He also said, "what is happening in Chile is legally incorrect and Australia has the right not to act in the extradition request".
The grounds of this argument were rejected by Justice Mortimer who said the claim "would throw the extradition law into chaos" while Justice Bromwich told Santisi that line of argument "is a dead-end for you".
Santisi again presented the argument repeated in previous appeals in which he claims that the material presented by Chile in the extradition request "is insufficient and does not prove that the DINA was an illegal group," and said that in the material "there is no clear statement that [Rivas] was officially present when these people were arrested," and therefore that would render the extradition invalid.
He also said that "DINA was a government office created by the law of that time. It was the law created by the Junta".
The Australian Attorney-General representative, Trent Glover, stated that there were no errors in the presentation of the extradition request and that "the crime of aggravated kidnapping existed at the time of Rivas' alleged conduct".
Justice Bromwich replied that “if the allegation would constitute an offence in Australia, that’s enough. That’s a matter for the courts in Chile”.
Sydney-based Lawyer Adriana Navarro, who represents families of Chilean victims in Australia, told SBS Spanish that Rivas' guilt or innocence "would be determined in Chile in the process followed by the courts there".
"Whether or not the DINA was a criminal organisation is an issue for Chile," she said.
Sydney-based Lawyer Adriana Navarro, who represents families of Chilean victims in Australia. Source: SBS Spanish
"The issue for Australia is whether the alleged conduct is sufficient to indicate that, in Australia, such conduct is equivalent to an extraditable offence. That is all the court in Australia has to determine."
The court was adjourned to a future date, which has not yet been set.
When contacted by SBS Spanish to gather reaction to today's events, Santisi said "it's a question whether the judges agree with my arguments or not, it's a matter for them to decide".
Supporters of victims and their families holding up images. Source: SBS Spanish/Esther Lozano
"I don't think they have decided one way or another just yet."
Santisi did not confirm whether his client intends to appeal further if the full bench decision isn't in their favour.
Similar claims were previously presented by Rivas and rejected by Federal Court Judge Wendy Abraham.
What are the next steps?
The full bench of the Federal Court will now decide if they consider Rivas to still be extraditable or not. It is uncertain how long this process will take.
If the Federal Court rules in Rivas' favour, she could walk free. If she is still found extraditable, Rivas could still take up the matter to the High Court of Australia.
In the final phase of the process, the Australian Attorney-General Michaelia Cash will be the one to issue the final extradition order.
A previous extradition process, the case of Dragan Vasiljković, a former Serbian paramilitary leader who was extradited to Croatia in 2015, took nine years to process after his arrest in Perth.
It is unknown how much Rivas knew about the crimes for which she is accused and to what degree she was involved, if extradited, those facts will have to be determined by the Chilean courts.
Rivas has denied all charges against her.
