<% ballot="203946" ' Check nothing is broken broken = 0 if ballot = "" then broken = 1 end if set vt = Server.Createobject("mps.Vote") openresult = vt.Open("Vote", "sa", "") ' Created object? if IsObject(vt) = TRUE then ' Opened db? if openresult = True AND broken = 0 then ballotresult = vt.SetBallotName(ballot) ' read the vote votetotal=(vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes")+vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no")) if votetotal <> 0 then ' there are votes in the database numberyes = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes") numberno = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no") percentyes = Int((numberyes/votetotal)*100) percentno = 100 - percentyes ' fix graph so funny graph heights dont appear 'if percentyes = 0 then ' percentyes = 1 'end if 'if percentno = 0 then ' percentno = 1 'end if else ' summut went wrong frig it numberyes = 0 numberno = 0 percentyes = 50 percentno = 50 end if end if end if %> Votes so far:

100% 0%			>		>
			Yes: <% =percentyes %>%		No: <% =percentno %>%

After his shameless self-amnesty in Chile, Pinochet extorted "diplomatic immunity" from Chile's government. If immunity "granted" in this way to a common criminal is recognised, Colombian drug lords and Russian mafiosi will soon be travelling on diplomatic passports. Will civilised nations recognise their "immunity" too?
Anyway, if some third world dictator like Pinochet murders Nato nationals and engages in international terrorism, Nato should invade and bring him to justice, as was done with Noriega. It is easy to defeat an army such as Chile's. Professional torturers, rapists and murderers never make good soldiers - remember the Falklands and Panama.
Alejandro Solá, Chile/Spain

If he was allowed into UK under diplomatic status, that status has to remain.
Sholto Douglas, Australia

Having lived in Chile during interesting times, I feel that Mr. Pinochet, his family and supporters need a bit more time to reflect. Reflect on murder. Reflect on torture. Reflect on imposing exile on people who have different ideas. Reflect, and ask for forgiveness. Chile has been a very sick society for quite some time. It is high time that all parties, and all people concerned should do a mea culpa and allow for the process of healing to begin. Bur for a profound wound to be healed, it needs first of all to be exposed and to be cleansed. Nobody has expressed regret for past evil deeds. It is high time, otherwise, the poison is going to go on through the generations of future Chileans. Legality aside, everybody should apologize for what happed a quarter of a century ago. Look at South Africa as a shining example.
Peter Langer, Canada

Now the Germans want him extradited. What hypocrisy! What ever happened to East German leaders that committed much greater human rights violations under communist rule. Under the current Socialist Europe, it is okay to commit abuses as long as you are a communist. But if you value free enterprise and want to help your people, you are branded a criminal. Pinochet should have known better than to go to a Socialist country like England. If he is not allowed to leave, only continued pain and suffering for all involved will ensue.
Bob Thompson, Canada

The UK and Spain have no rights to prosecute Pinochet. Chile is an independent country with its own laws and justice. If there are crimes, they must be demonstrated and judged in Chile. What will the UK people think if somebody in other country sues the UK Prime Minister because of the Ireland anti-terrorist actions? How many people have been killed there in the last 20 years? Will the UK people accept the competence of other countries courts on those cases?
Carlos Johnson, Chile

How can anyone argue that his crimes were acts of state? He doesn't even claim that! He says that "excesses" that were committed during his rule were the act of rogue secret police agents, although he is famous for stating that in Chile "not a tree leaf quivers" without his knowledge. Britain has a chance to make history in a fitting way to end the 20th Century: by stating that human rights violations will never go unpunished.
Justo Serpa, Chile

I think he should pay for what he did, I was in prison in Chile in 1975, I was only 16 then...he should pay for his crimes.
Carmen Quezada, USA

Definitely not. Human life is precious and anyone who is responsible for taking human life directly or indirectly should be punished. The Pinochet case is not about the diplomatic relationship between countries, it is about justice.
Teddy, USA

His trial and punishment will not bring back the dead, nor heal the traumatised. It is only revenge. He is an old man and no longer dangerous. Let mercy prevail and leave him to his conscience.
Lore Meredith, England

Without knowing the detailed facts of the case, my initial response is that in all probability the assertions made by a number of representatives of victims of the Chilean Regime are true. And that Pinochet being ultimately responsible for any such crimes against humanity, should at least be tried. It would be a scandal if Britain were seen to be a defender of criminals against humanity.
David Powell, France

For all those people who say "let the Chileans decide", also ask the question why many Chileans are still afraid of saying anything at all. I think fear still runs in many Chileans while Pinochet and his allies are still alive.
UK

He does not deserve freedom. He is a criminal and must pay for his crimes.
Claudio Aliaga, Chile

Send him home! It is not right to prosecute this man, without the consent of the Chilean people. Also, wasn't it Pinochet that helped us? Even though he did use torture on some of his people, he didn't harm us, did he?! Also, what happens if we do arrest Pinochet? This then means that if English people visit Chile, we will be in quite stark danger, and if the Queen goes, she could get arrested in principle for killing IRA members and Argentinean soldiers in the Falklands War.
Lucy Moseley, England

Pinochet should be made to stand trial in Spain to explain the whereabouts of the 3000+ "disappeared" persons in Chile. While Pinochet did apparently turn Chile into a relatively organized country this does not justify by any means the killing of thousands of men and women which were taken into custody and subsequently executed.
Horst, Chile

Pinochet is a war criminal. The victims of his regime deserve justice. To say that a person is exempt from punishment for mass murder because they were the leader of a state beggars belief. Surely with increased power comes increased responsibility, therefore this position of power that Pinochet abused should be all the more reason for his punishment. Think about it, according to the Supreme Courts principles one shouldn't punish Hitler for what he did to the Jews. The International Criminal Court that Britain endorsed in Rome is designed to deal with people like Pinochet, is Britain going to make a habit of going back on its word?
Abigail Sampson, UK

Neither the press nor most people outside of Chile have really understood some key points about the Pinochet years: 1) That Pinochet was actually ASKED by the Chilean parliament to overthrow Allende two weeks before his coup - which one could say turns the coup into an "authorized" event, and 2) that from 1973-1982 Chile was actually in a state of semi-civil war, with terrorists armed by Cuba frequently attacking and massacring police and government officials.
Nearly all of the "disappeared" occurred during this period. I learned none of this until I lived in Chile for a year. In other words, it is often not for others to judge what has happened in a country without all the FACTS. So if Pinochet is to be prosecuted, why not Castro, Milosovic, or a few others who are responsible for TENS of thousands of deaths???
Mike Irrgang, Houston, USA

When they turn the old dictator from an "English patient" into a "Spanish prisoner" then we will witness some form of justice.
Leonardo, USA

The end justifies the means, Pinochet stopped Communism. His troops may have been brutal but only Chile can judge this and it is a dangerous precedent if leaders cannot travel abroad without the threat of prosecution by those who disagree with their policies. There are no UNIVERSAL Human Rights, only those which each country has chosen for itself.
G.S.Brown, New Zealand

What is the message we send if we don't send Pinochet back? That we don't trust the Chilean government to deal with the situation?
Jon Livesey, USA

England's actions threaten the stability of Chile. If Pinochet is sent to Spain more people will suffer.
Matthew Thomson, Chile

What happened to Democracy, so highly touted in the US? Chile is a sovereign nation, with a long, if not continuous democratic tradition. Non-Chileans have no authority, moral or legal, in the affairs of our country. The people of Chile have made their decision, and if the minority or the Communist judges of Spain don't like it, they should appeal to the government. No foreigner has the right to re-open old wounds and disturb the country's peace.
Raul Alessandri Trivelli, USA

An English court has ruled that Pinochet has diplomatic immunity. It is also reported that he was in the UK as a guest of the Ministry of Defense and had been assured that he would not be detained in the UK. The Blair government has recently turned down a legitimate request from the German government to extradite Roisin McAliskey. The Blair government has also recently had a rather friendly visit to China where under a communist dictator, thousands of political prisoners are held in slave labour camps and many are executed daily. Despite the self-righteous indignation of those who criticise the Thatcher government for having worked with the Pinochet government, the pretense that Labour has a more ethical foreign policy than the Conservatives is laughable. The rule of law should be obeyed, diplomatic immunity should be respected and Pinochet should be allowed to leave the UK.
Alan Murphy, USA

This is the only chance for justice: he made sure that he could not be prosecuted in Chile. He does not deserve the treatment of a chief of state since he appointed himself as such and created an illegal constitution to protect himself. He is still holding Chile and its "half" democratic governmemt hostage.
Mejia, Canada

Crimes against Humanity should not go unpunished. The UK should not tolerate dictators in power or retired in its territory.
Eduardo Villaseca, USA

The fact that the Chilean government has chosen not to prosecute Pinochet is fairly irrelevant in my opinion, as the Spanish judge wishes (as I understand it) to try him for the murder of Spanish citizens. Would we not be slighting the Spanish justice system if we refused to extradite him? And how is it that we can lobby actively for the extradition of the people alleged to have planted the Lockerbie bomb, while at the same time allowing a man who has killed many more people than the bombers to go free?
Richard Galloway, United Kingdom

The Ruling on Pinochet has clearly shown the difference between the Rule of Law and Justice. Certainly the UK might be legally bound to let this man go free, but does that serve justice? In stating that only the International Court may prosecute this individual, and yet not taking any action to do so, while he is under detention, demonstrates a clear example of the courts shirking their responsibility to justice.
Humberto Videla, Canada

By rights, Pinochet must go to Spain to face the courts there. If he were to return to Argentina, the whole event becomes a farce of monumental proportions. Surely the victims of Pinochet's cruel rule, deserve to see brought to justice.
Donna McLachlan, Australia

If Pinochet is allowed to go free then just what did Hitler and Stalin do that was so wrong?
Tim Cleary, Ireland

Arresting Pinochet the first time and then letting him free would considerably harm Britain's dignity. I have very little knowledge of international law, but if it is important enough to forget a dictator's atrocities then why we don't just hand him to Spain and let the choice be up to them? Regarding what is said, that Pinochet stopped communism, there is only one efficient drug for this curse: Democracy. In recent history many countries revolted against a dictatorship to establish communism or revolted against communism to establish democracy, but absolutely no one shifted from democracy to communism.
N. Missoulis, Greece & England

The U.K. should let Pinochet go home today, he should never have been arrested in the first place. What has been going on in London the last few weeks can only be compared to a "lynching", the Blair government allowing a group of agitated leftist, working themselves up to a collective hysteria, calling for the senator's head. Let Pinochet go home without delay.
Manuel Gonzalez, Chile

Reading what other have said shows a definite lack of moral fibre on the part of the pro-Pinochet supporters. The whole point is nothing to do with diplomatic immunity, costs to the taxpayer of Chile's stability, but an acknowledgement of our common humanity, and our common responsibilities to that humanity. Pinochet must stand to account for his crimes or it diminishes us all, and our children will wonder about our apathy.
Thomas Brown, Scotland

Of course he should go. Chile's democratically elected government has decided not to put him on trial. What right do other countries have to challenge this?
If we had a Government which didn't practice infantile student union style politics, this issue would have been sorted out two weeks ago.
Paul Jemetta, UK

Here is a man who is responsible for mass murder not only of Chile's citizens, but also other countries. As a result he is clearly charged with crimes against humanity by a European judge. for Britain to let him go would be a despicable act of cowardice.
Solomon Bogale, USA

Pinochet is no doubt a ruthless dictator, but Chile has chosen to settle the past rather than live in it. The Chileans seem to think letting him off is a fair price to pay to allow them to move on. You might as well arrest Mandela for the bombs that the ANC set off or President Nixon for the Vietnamese that he ordered to be killed and raped in MyLai.
Hean Ong, UK

This sounds like a case of Pinochet being more equal than other dictators. Sure Pinochet may find solace and immunity in Britain, but this is like a stab in the back for those of us who believe in "Human rights for all" and "accountability for all human rights abusers". For a long time I have regarded Britain as the true champion of human rights but the decision to free Pinochet shatters my heart.
Maybe the British should signal their love for human rights violating dictators by sending out letters to Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Col Mengistu and maybe even Pol Pot if he had still been alive and inviting them to stay in Britain. At least there they will be guaranteed that they will enjoy immunity.
Jupiter Punungwe, Zimbabwe

You have tarnished the image of perhaps the only world leader who defeated communism. Having lived in Chile I saw first hand the accomplishments for the Chileans that this great man did. Great Britain enjoyed a warm and mutual friendship with the Chilean government under Pinochet. Many of my British friends who lived in Chile at the time were impressed by his leadership, his love of country, and his devotion to what was thought best for his countrymen. How ironic, that on the visit of a past enemy's delegation, Argentina, you allow the arrest of a former ally and great leader. I recommend that the Prime Minister offer a complete apology to Chile, and allow the general to return to his native land.
Rick Guidry, USA

Anyone who may have done the things he is reported to have done must have his day in court.
George Kacica Jr., USA

Even though I would be very pleased seeing Mr Pinochet behind the bars, we should be conscious that the most imortant thing is to respect the international agreements that keep that delicate equilibrium that is so important to the development of young democracies such as those fomer Chile and Argentina. If England, as part of the "underpinnings" of international community, fails to preserve each country's right to solve its own problems, then you will be taking one step back and not forward. Despite this law-above-all-for-international-community-subistence thing, you must understand that democracies in some places, and especially in Chile, are very fragile. They are going through a process you Englishmen, never knew and never felt. Let me tell you that in this situations it takes only a little spark to burn down this dry and delicate forest. Therefore they demand your special attention.
Sebastian Gil, Argentina

No, the guy should not be allowed to go home, at least not so quickly. I believe he should be allowed to go home after some time because of his frail health condition. But if his health is not too bad, he should be allowed to go through all the legal proceedings anyone can bring against him, at least to embarrass him. What the guy did was and is still unacceptable. But the lives he took were worth more than his life at this time. Therefore, sending his to jail will not do anything to correct the wrong. Unless he could be killed for the heineous crimes that he committed, but again, he has already lived the full-term of his life! I think the harrassment is enough. Nevertheless, I believe this case should serve as a warning to hundreds of dictators in Africa and everywhere else around the world. I hope the world get on their cases before it's too late.
Johnicala J. USA

Every Somoza, Batista and Pinochet of the future will assume they can swan into our country whenever they feel like it if Pinochet is freed. I object to mass murderers benefiting from our NHS (Pinochet was treated in an Edinburgh NHS hospital on a previous visit).
Moyra Davies, Scotland

Would Hitler be allowed to go home because he was Head of State when he exterminated 6 million? Would Pol Pot for the genocide of Cambodians because he was Head of State at the time? This is a pathetic excuse. Those who use political or military power to butcher their people are worse than ordinary murders because they abuse their position. They should be tried accordingly. If not in national courts then in an international court. We should make an example of Pinochet for the sake of the families of all his victims whatever their nationality.
Barry Tregear, UK

What about crimes against humanity?
V Whyte, Switzerland

I do not believe that kidnapping, murder, torture, and international terrorism are among the normally accepted duties of the head of state. For this reason, I do not see that the immunity normally granted to heads of state should protect Pinochet in this case. However, if, as now seems likely, he is allowed to return home, I hope that the British government will make it clear to him that he is not welcome to visit our country again.
Jane Reynolds, Germany

General Pinochet's arrest cannot be viewed through a prism of returned political favours. It is a moral and a legal issue. Invoking "diplomatic immunity" would have been appropriate had he been an accredited, respectable, serving official of a duly-constituted Government. The idea of "immune" senators-for-life would be laughable if it were not such a tragic travesty. It gives all murderous dictators a good example of how to constitute successor "Governments". Even if he qualified for "immunity" (rapidly becoming a dirty word), precedence has it that capital crimes like genocide or murder are punishable in any jurisdiction. He committed worse crimes than Gen. Noriega of Panama, and he is not more special than, say, Pol Pot. If guilty of genocide and other felonies, he should be tried and handed down an appropriate sentence.
J. Pittchar, Zambia

Would Hitler not be arrested if he turned up in England?
Chris Gregory, Australia

There seems to be a great deal of evidence that Pinochet was involved in a great number of disappearances. The victims deserve a trial.
Doreen Freeman, USA

If I understand the reason for quashing the extradition order correctly, Pinochet can go home simply because he is an ex-head of state. This implies that practically no genocide can be convicted because most of them were heads of state, like Hitler and Pol Pot. If there is no possibility that those who wield such great power over the lives of so many vulnerable people can be called to account, we might as well push the button now. Give him a nice comfortable cell, there is no need to torture him or execute him, as he did to so many.
John Sweeney, Mexico

Mr Pinochet should definitely be allowed to go home. This is nothing but human rights! No one, from a developed country, or a developing country, could be detained without any reason by a third nation asked for extradition. Queen Elizabeth II made lots of wrongdoings during her reign in the past decades, should she be arrested and extradited to Argentina, India, or some other countries?
James Wang, China

So it has come to this. Mass murderers receiving mass sympathy in the mass media merely by appearing as sweet little old men - remarkable. There is the chance that Pinochet may be made to answer for his crimes because of a technicality regarding his diplomatic status. The fact that so many others escape justice makes not one jot of difference. The systematic murder and torture of others is unacceptable, no matter which way it's dressed up and tied with pink ribbons with a big bow. It would come as no surprise to find the majority of Chileans, including government members, delighted at the prospect of justice being meted out by a third party without the dangers of implication.
Rafael, UK

He should not be sent home because of the fact that he is using the Diplomatic passport as well as his title in false way. It is apparently legitimate. But as everybody knows that he imposed that clause to the Chilli's constitution, he is committing an offence, that is, cheating the International Law. Why shouldn't he use his own personal passport while he is on a personal trip? Beyond that if some of the Serbian war Criminals can get diplomatic passports from Milosevic, then it means that anybody who is suspected of the commission of a crime against humanity, can travel freely throughout the world with diplomatic passport.
A Shahram Kholdi, Canada

Pinochet should go home after he has stood trial, and not before. Does anybody really doubt that he will be treated fairly by the English and Spanish courts?
Paul Hardy, UK

The disgraceful and dishonourable treatment meted out to General Pinochet represents a nadir for Britain. The only member of the Government to show any common sense in this tawdry affair so far is the Attorney-General John Morris is refusing his consent to private prosecutions on the sound grounds of insufficient evidence. Unlike his more junior colleagues, Mr. Morris is old enough to remember the whole history of the Cold War and to have enjoyed a university education before such places were seriously corrupted by political prejudice. He, unlike former fellow travelling student leftists of the present Cabinet like Jack Straw has followed sound legal reasoning and has not allowed dubious political considerations to prevail. The only positive outcome of this matter is that it has exposed the Blair so-called New Labour in its true 'old socialist' colours, and has been an opportunity for the judiciary to demonstrate its independence.
A.A.Preece, Australia

Let a man responsible for numerous atrocities go free? I can't see another viewpoint to this matter. It doesn't matter how old and frail he is! He should be brought to justice.
Michael Coppins, UK

My thoughts have strongly paralleled those of Bamber, in that merely because Pinochet has wrangled a legal deal with the most recent government of Chile in which they absolve him of all sins and allow him to remain in a position of power, this does not mean he has suddenly become blameless in these actions that he authorised. His 'diplomatic' passport is a sham, and if he hadn't had many of the doctors in his own country arrested, tortured and 'disappeared' then he could have had the Surgery in Chile. Grrr.
Chuck Skinner, USA

On purely moral and ethical grounds, I firmly believe that Pinochet should not be allowed to return home. It was precisely because he was Head of State that this man was able to commit unspeakable crimes against not only his own nationals but foreign nationals as well. The incredible suffering that this man has wrought upon innocent men, women and children should be brought to the centre of all legal deliberations. To ignore this would render meaningless any national judicial system, which purports to uphold justice and human rights.
Mrs Charles Fayet, Canada

Why don't we send him home first class on an airline? May I suggest Iberia, making a stop-over in Spain?
Paul Rushworth, London UK

This just proves what a disgrace the British justice system is. But then when arms deals and economic interests are at stake it shows what side the courts will take.
Anon, UK

Professor Wilkinson obfuscates the problem of the detention of Gral Pinochet in London. He is wrong in saying that a diplomatic passport is simply a status simble. Maybe that is the way diplomatic passports are treated in Britain. Not so in Chile. It is for this reason that Gral Pinochet was right ion protesting for his detention. The Government of Chile had appointed him "agent" to respond to the invitation of Royal Ordnance (Arms Factory), to assess defence needs on behalf of the Chilean government. This has been systematically left out of news in the Anglophone world. Why? Are these press institutions not obliged to present the facts as they really are? All of this would have been avoided if Mr Blair had really treated the Government of Chile as an equal rather than something somewhat lesser than Britain, which is what led his government to deny the diplomatic immunity that the Chilean Government insisted Gral Pinochet had. Besides being extremely rude this behaviour is illegal and cowardly. May Mr. Blair learn from the courts!
Enrique, Italy

Britain is still a nation that honours international laws. Karl Marx stayed here after being driven from the continent. Refugees from Europe often found sanctuary there after being denied such in many other countries. Despite the emotionalism generated by Pinochet's arrest it was best that the British judge declared to have 'Diplomatic Immunity.' Other wise those in the U.S. who aided Pinochet's coup could also have been arrested whenever visiting the U.K. Or even those Britons still alive who colluded with the C.I.A. to restore the Shah to power in Iran in 1953.
STEPHEN BLOC, USA

Pinochet's release is certainly in keeping with British tradition. Governor Eyre was found not guilty. The House of Lords raised its moral fiber by vindicating Dwyer.
Qssen, US

It is a national disgrace that the General was unlawfully arrested in the first place. Heads of State past and present cannot be indicted on the whim of some tin pot judiciary namely Spain in this case. This whole episode is a sad reflection on the insensitivity of our Police Force yet again shooting from the hip then leaving the public purse to pick up the bill.
Allan Vining, UK

The British High Court is asking the rest of the world to go blind and silent in front of a well-known criminal. This is a shame.
Javier Amaya, United States

Why not treat General Pinochet the same way as the Allies treated Imperial Japanese Army General Yamashita. Even Heads of State, however well intentioned can not murder, torture and commit genocide in the name of the State. Sovereign duties do not cover these acts. The British High Court has demonstrated that the Sovereign can be above the Law ! Laws are there to be just and equitable. Why under English law the Sovereign is treated differently from its Subject in the commission of crimes against humanity and its own citizens. No Legal Principle can defend grave crimes as being a part of Statecraft ! The English Laws must be brought up to date and not permit serious criminals to escape the bar of justice even though the crime has been committed by a Head of State.
MO AHMED, USA

The man has a diplomatic passport. To detain him jeopardises anyone else travelling with diplomatic credentials.
Nash Keel, USA

I am not convinced by the argument that because we cannot deliver justice to all murders and torturers that Pinochet should escape scott free. Neither am I persuaded that because Chile says 'Let bygones be bygones' so should the international community. Surely, the Chilean's attitude is attributable to the fact that there is a gun pointed at their collective heads!
Tim Wheeler, U.K.

The 1980 Iranian hostage crisis should have taught everyone the dangers of fooling around with diplomatic immunity. Do we really want to open this can of worms?
James Castro, USA

My personal view is that he should not go home - he should be extradited to face trial for the crimes committed by his regime. However, it is now a matter for the Law Lords to decide.
Jon Ball, UK

Pinochet and the Chilean government came to an accommodation to protect the stability of Chile's fragile democracy. For us or Spain to attempt any prosecution without the approval of the Chilean government was not only ill-advised, it was dangerous. Whatever Pinochet's crimes he should be released because of the danger posed to Chilean stability if he is not. (Don't forget it was outside meddling in Chilean affairs by the US that brought Pinochet to power in the first place). The sad thing about this episode is that the British justice system has been made to look uncaring and stupid by declaring that a head of state has immunity whatever the crime. The issue of Chilean stability is the only genuine reason for not prosecuting Pinochet. Our justice system must be the laughing stock of the world after this debacle.
Richard, UK

Release the old man and respect the diplomatic immunity of international figures from the third world.
Raage, Norway

Back to top | BBC News Home | BBC Homepage | ©