The statement of reasons for findings of fact in the new Chilean criminal procedure. A diagnosis

Abstract

The study offers an analysis of the observance of the new regulations requiring the statement of reasons for the conclusions on evidence in criminal judicial decisions. The author discusses the existence of several doubts on the road towards a solid statement of reasons that proves to be harmonious with the “analytical model” set down in the directives of the Code of Criminal Procedure. She then explores which factors can explain the persistence of these uncertainties. Special importance is attributed to some conceptual deficiencies and errors present in the Chilean procedural culture. Of note, above all, is the adverse impact that the predominance –reinforced by the introduction of the standard of proof “beyond all reasonable doubt”– of a subjectivist notion of evidence has.