Chilean oncologist Manuel Álvarez Zenteno (63 years old) was a respected man in his field. An eminence. His career as director of the Cancer Center of the Pontifical Catholic University and the Clinical Cancer Center of the Las Condes Clinic, in addition to his international experience, explained why parliamentarians, mayors and all kinds of seriously ill patients sought treatment with him. Last May, the Chilean justice system sentenced him to seven years in prison for the consummated and repeated crime of sexual abuse against two victims in 2016 and 2017, one of whom died during the judicial process. The Metropolitan East Prosecutor’s Office requested preventive detention for the doctor, who denies the facts, until the sentence was final and enforceable, which had been taking place for two months. But in an unexpected turn of events in the highly publicized case, the Supreme Court on Friday granted the defense’s request to release him pending a decision on annulment, which will be heard on July 24.
The legal team representing the oncologist, headed by attorney César Ramos, obtained freedom when they filed an appeal to reverse the preventive detention, arguing that there was no “legal basis” to decree the exceptional precautionary measure that Álvarez had been serving since April 23 – when the verdict was announced. The Santiago Court of Appeals rejected it. They then escalated to the Supreme Court, where they also claimed that the court had not taken into account their arguments as to why their client is not a danger to society.
In a split decision, the Supreme Court granted Álvarez freedom –with national roots and a ban on approaching his victims– while the defense’s appeal for annulment is resolved due to allegations of fact –they deny that it occurred–, poor assessment of evidence, among other points. The magistrates justified the controversial decision by arguing that the court must hear the arguments of both parties regarding preventive detention. “It cannot be done by only looking at the background and arguments of fact and law invoked by the petitioner,” but rather, it must express why the defense’s background “was not valid, useful or sufficient.” In summary, the ruling establishes that the resolution “does not contain argumentative development” on why they determined that Alvarez is a danger to society and there is a possibility of escape.
The plaintiff’s lawyer, Susana Borzutzky, criticises the decision, as she points out that it could facilitate the escape options of a convicted person days before the appeal for annulment is resolved. “It is inconceivable,” she told EL PAIS. “What more does the Supreme Court minister need than a sentence that confirms the facts beyond all reasonable doubt? The signal that is sent is that people with influence and in a better position find a way out and are not deprived of their freedom. This affects confidence in our institutions and puts the principle of equality of law in jeopardy,” she added. She also assures that the evidence was assessed by the oral court, that the convicted person testified for two days and that the judge listened to both parties during the 45 days that the trial lasted.
For his part, Barros, Álvarez’s defense attorney, has highlighted the ruling: “The Supreme Court has put an end to the illegal deprivation of liberty of more than two months to which our client was subjected (…). From the beginning we questioned the unfounded, illegal and arbitrary decision of the court that convicted him and left him in preventive detention,” he added. Regarding the appeal for annulment that will be heard in three weeks, Borzutzky hopes that “it will confirm the ruling issued by an impartial court, which made a correct assessment of the evidence in a scenario in which there was a correct exercise of the defense and that, after all the evidence was submitted, it was proven beyond all reasonable doubt that Dr. Álvarez betrayed the trust and abused his patient, whose life was in his hands.”
“I saw him as a savior”
The seven-year prison sentence imposed by the Third Oral Criminal Court of Santiago was unanimous, in a case where the trust placed in the treating oncologist in such a serious disease played a key role. The ruling established that one of the victims, MG, diagnosed with stage IV rectal cancer with metastasis, was sexually abused by the doctor “on several occasions” at the Clínica Las Condes Cancer Center (CLC) in 2016 and 2017. Álvarez, “taking advantage of the doctor-patient relationship, the absolute trust that the victim placed in him and the situation of extreme vulnerability in which she found herself, carried out actions of sexual significance and relevance against her, taking advantage of her inability to oppose,” the ruling states. The last episode occurred on November 28, 2017, when a nurse entered the patient’s room and discovered the doctor abusing her.
The nurse filed a complaint with the Investigative Police (PDI) and the patient confirmed her story. In addition, MG filed her own complaint. Then more than a dozen women did the same –four have already died and nine cases are prescribed, so the Prosecutor’s Office took their statements in this case as witnesses and not as victims–. MG recorded a three-hour video with her testimony before dying at the age of 66 last September. Attorney Borzutzky points out that this trial is about what her client recounted in the video she recorded: “That between being abused and dying, she chose to be abused, because the treating doctor told her that he was the only one capable of saving her life.”
The other victim in the case that led to the oncologist’s conviction is MRT, diagnosed with breast cancer in 2008, who began treatment with Álvarez at the Catholic University Cancer Center. The patient then continued to be monitored by the specialist at the CLC. On at least two occasions, between 2016 and 2017, he abused her in his office.
In 2017, the CLC fired the oncologist after the complaint against the nurse. Álvarez filed a complaint for unjustified dismissal that he won, receiving compensation of 210 million Chilean pesos (about 222,000 dollars). The specialist began working in southern Chile where, according to the court, he continued his aggression. Last year, the Punta Arenas Criminal Court sentenced him to 818 days in prison, with the benefit of intensive probation, for the crime of sexual abuse of a patient with terminal cancer in May 2019. The woman died before the trial.
At the end of 2022, the Clínica Las Condes hired the already questioned doctor again. He lasted eight days. MG continued to be treated at the health facility and the re-admission of her until then alleged abuser caused great rejection among the staff. The Fourth Guarantee Court of Santiago accepted a request from the prosecutor and decreed the prohibition of the oncologist from entering the CLC.
The hearings of the Álvarez trial were declared secret, but Third The court ruled that the oncologist justified the sexual acts as part of the physical examination. The testimonies of the victims reveal the dependence and hope they had on a doctor, considering him an eminence in his specialty. “I saw him as a savior,” said one. During the consultations they used “strategies” to minimize the abuse, such as thicker and firmer underwear, difficult to remove. But the asymmetrical power relationship, the fear of not being believed or of ending a treatment that was giving results, made the victims speak about their experiences in private. Until they spoke up.
Subscribe here to the EL PAÍS Chile newsletter and receive all the key information on current events in the country.
#Waiting #final #verdict #story #Chilean #oncologist #convicted #sexually #abusing #patients
