Road safety and the value of human life in chile

The Value of Human Life has been the torture of philosophers and jurists, when they face quantifying it in the specific case of compensation. The right of the heirs and third parties who suffer from the loss of a loved one is not discussed and said Moral Damage can be credited.

The question that arises is whether the Moral Damage of the deceased victim is transmitted or not to his heirs.

We reasonably believe that it is.

Well, especially, in cases of road, work, hospital accidents, there is an obvious Moral Damage in the deceased. But, even more, Life itself, as an intangible or intangible legal asset, is part of the transferable patrimony, without prejudice to the quantification of the material contributions that cease with the death of a person.

1. Introduction

The classic question that the poet imposes on "to be or not to be" is resolved affirmatively as soon as there is a recognition of existence, that is, of "being". We can affirm then, that if life "is", in our society everything that is, can be valued. It has the possibility of being quantified, without any explanation other than by the fact of being, okay. Well, well, society gives a value to all the goods that make up people's assets, consequently, life, part of that heritage, the most important of the assets that the person possesses, cannot be left out of this quantification.

This would imply despising the meaning-value of Life, devaluing it to its detriment, in relation to material goods. Argentine jurist Matilde Zavala de Gonzales expresses, “Thus, of human goods, life is the first and the last: man is such when life begins and ceases to be when it ends. This shows that life is the radical reality, according to Ortega y Gasset, the one where all the others take root. ”(” P.19; Damages compensation ”; Matilde Zavala; Hammurabi, 1996”)

As for value, we must warn that human life is outside of commerce and therefore, society is not prepared to give a price. Matter, which for insurers is not as difficult as for sentencing, who in any case are really greedy in quantifying the greatest legal good of man.

2.- Different doctrinal positions.-

However, it is realistic to say that not everyone recognizes the value of human life. Furthermore, many people have never wondered if their own life has a value, understanding this as a common currency of exchange. Even when the system proposes that everything is salable and appreciable in money. Now, well, if the system itself is based on the values or prices of the most insignificant material things, why is there so much opposition to quantifying human life and giving it a value as part of the moral and spiritual patrimony, unique and exclusive of "being? "Considered in his existence as a person?

The questions that have permanently arisen in the minds of jurists and those interested in unraveling the doubts of the Law regarding Life, are expressed precisely at the moment that we are faced with the loss that a human person suffers from this legal right. The primary question is: Does this legal asset have the possible value of being expressed in current money? Is it possible to consider Life as part of the heritage of the human person? This value of Life,can it be transferred to the heirs of the deceased? Is Life a Personal Right and as such non-transferable? Does Life only have equity value for its owner? These are some of the questions that civil law scholars will continue to ask themselves until the legislative work threads the norms by which the Judges and the parties must adhere to the dynamic action in the search for an end at least reparative. "What is called elliptically" valuation of human life! Is nothing other than the measurement of the amount of damage suffered by those who were recipients of all or part of the economic goods that the deceased produced, and because of that source of income that is extinguished ”(page 265,“ Civil Liability ”; Alberto J. Bueres; Hammurabi, Second Edition, May 1997, Ar”).))May 1997, Ar ”.)May 1997, Ar ”.)

3.- Very Personal Rights.

Life, such as honor, personal and family dignity, the right to identity, name, image, and other rights of a similar nature are known as very personal rights, insofar as they structure and characterize man, as an individual, unique being and unrepeatable, and from the point of view of how this being has its space in society and is the basis of it.

It can be concluded that society suffers and is degraded inasmuch as it ignores the very personal rights of the human person, or despises or devalues them, allowing the destruction of Human Life to be played every day and obtained based on the enjoyment of impunity that the same society allows in the exercise of the act and role of its organs and agents. “Society is a whole. A unit differentiated from the sum of its components, but the greater the determination and respect for personalities without completely destroying the whole, the more characterized and stronger society will be; with an indelible seal by the strength of its members that give it being and unity. The mass is weak like the members that compose it, it is mass because those do not count, they are inestimated objects at the service of the arrogant "(" Personal Rights ", Santos Cifuentes,2nd ed. Edit. Astrea, 1955, BA) One, consequence that arises from this statement, refers to the recognition that man is the fundamental subject of law and of all legal systems. But, moreover, it is the central subject for whose respect, development and prosperity, all social life and all its disciplines must move, including and especially economics.

4.- Human Life and Social Risks.

The proposed issue can be attacked from the perspective of the classic concept of fault liability, embedded in the obstacles inherent to rights with subjective linkage or, from a more up-to-date vision that looks at the rights of the victim, more exposed today, in the feverish bustle of the inventions of technology and science, which in the bucolic domains of the Roman Empire, from where the law of obligations based on responsibility for fault, dominates us as more than three thousand years ago.

The Life of the human person is not alien to the risks that society itself creates in the advancement of technological development projects, resulting, to say the least, anachronistic that liability by fault, for example, in road accidents, have the same treatment that existed in the days of the cart pulled by slow-moving cancine animals, when those risks, in cities and highways, have multiplied by thousands of times, and for this reason every weekend the newspapers give an account of dozens of people died on the roads of the country.

So, it is not difficult to accept that the irrational adherence to the Law elaborated hundreds of years ago, must choose to adapt to the demands of our days, in the perspective of offering greater protection to the legal right that concerns us: The Life of the Person Humana and its assessment.

We must recognize that the answers to these questions do not only matter to jurists, there is also a search in the world for the principles that govern economics; the sociology; The education; social medicine and social security, as guarantees granted by the Fundamental Charter, but, all of them, provided for a common purpose, the defense of Life and consequently, the right to respect and protect it, the State turning, at times, to penalize the infractions and illegal against it, as well as to determine the obligation to repair the Damage that has been caused.

5.- Articles 1437 and 1556 of the code of beauty.

We could not be faithful to the analysis of the text indicated if we do not previously refer to the legal formula that establishes the source of the obligations

Art. 1437 Obligations arise, already from the actual contest of the wills of two or more people, as in contracts or conventions; already from a voluntary act of the person who commits himself, as in the acceptance of an inheritance or legacy and in all quasi-contracts; already as a result of an act that has inflicted injury or harm to another person, as in crimes and quasi-crimes; already by provision of the law, as between parents and children subject to parental authority.

There are no more sources than those that the Law has established and, if we break down the preceding provision, we can state that they are:

In agreement of wills between two or more people. Of a voluntary act of the person who commits himself. Of the Quasi-contracts. Of the Crimes.- Of the near misdeeds. Of the legislative will expressed in the Law.

The legal text carries in its form the content that gives the classicist sense in its application, since it consigns subjective elements of the greatest importance when indicating the consent or agreement of wills; the will of the person who is bound by his own act, subject to the determination of his internal jurisdiction; action motivated by fraud or fault, depending on whether it is crimes or quasi-crimes.

Among all this manifestation of civilian subjectivism, the will of the legislator expressed through the Law, appears as a strange and different element, and the jurist must be very careful to separate the Law as a different entity from the previous ones, then, in the strict sense, all sources are a product of it. The most evident manifestation of the legislative will, starting from the existence of the normative legal body that contains them, which is, without a doubt, a Law.

6.- Absence of norm on the Value of Human Life.

In this normative habitat there cannot exist, and in fact does not exist, an organic, harmonious answer between the law and its application in today's world, and the conclusions that jurists and doctrine can obtain, or the answers that leave no doubt. of the certainty of the reasoning that on this matter could reach, for the benefit of the disciplines that accompany the daily actions of man's life, closely linked to the conclusions that are requested.

In a more direct sense, there has been no passionate concern for solving the problem of the compensation value of the life of the human person. This is strange, when the Constitutions of the most civilized countries and the great declarations of international agreements, propose the Life of the human being, as the greatest legal asset that it can possess. There is an unfortunate incongruity between what is said and what is done. What is worse, indifference and relaxation in the national judiciary, to give serious messages about what the Court of Cassation or the Constitutional Court, hold in this regard, in order to save an important regulatory absence.

Good judicial disposition must cease to be an appropriate method to resolve such important matters. This, because, recognizing the high role of the Judges, their probity to all evidence and the experience in the jurisdictional treatment system, it does not result, from another presentable point of view that, for example: A company is sentenced to pay for Moral Damage to a worker the sum of $ 40,000,000, for the loss of a foot, a higher court than the one that set the compensatory sum, has raised it to $ 70,000,000, not for estimating a high sum that figure, which must be made clear, the loss of a limb is for life and the pain, at least moral, due to the disability and physical deterioration, will prevail until the death of the victim. Otherwise, because it is not in harmony with the above,that is expressed as the motivation for a ruling condemning another company for the death of a worker, that the average granted for compensation for the death of a worker is not more than $ 50,000,000. Ergo, cogito, that the value of Moral Damage for the loss of a foot, in some special circumstance is higher than the value of Moral Damage, for the loss of the life of a loved one. It should be emphasized that the perception of the pretium pain is in one case or the other, the same, without it being possible to argue that this varies because it is the accident's own pain, in the first case, and is a residual value or due to repercussion, in the second.that the value of the Moral Damage for the loss of a foot, in some special circumstance is higher than the value of the Moral Damage, for the loss of the life of a loved one. It should be emphasized that the perception of the pretium pain is in one case or the other, the same, without it being possible to argue that this varies because it is the accident's own pain, in the first case, and is a residual value or due to repercussion, in the second.that the value of the Moral Damage for the loss of a foot, in some special circumstance is higher than the value of the Moral Damage, for the loss of the life of a loved one. It should be emphasized that the perception of the pretium pain is in one case or the other, the same, without it being possible to argue that this varies because it is the accident's own pain, in the first case, and is a residual value or due to repercussion, in the second.

This irregularity of decisions, although, from our point of view, does not threaten legal security, as has been argued by some authors, the truth is that it causes serious friction with respect to the constitutional guarantee of equality before the Law and the right to protection of this equality. Legal security is not damaged, as long as there is an express recognition of the right claimed, thus complying with the constitutional mandate that is manifested concretely in a ruling that establishes the quantum, giving shape to the principles of the obligations under the system of the classical doctrine.

Another different thing is that, in the application of the formula to calculate said quantum, there is no equality of appraisals compared to similar cases, which clearly is a legal vacuum, which cannot be imputed to the Judges, even when reviewing some rulings we find ridiculous and ridiculous figures, which do not exceed fifty million pesos.

7.- Examples of Valuation of Life and Integrity.

The importance that I emphasize in these avaricious valuation sums refers more than anything to the circumstance that the Judges are authorized to prudently fix the quantum, and when it assumes an amount not adequate to the value of the legal asset lost by the action of a Third, the judiciary does not send the appropriate signals regarding respect for life, moreover, it appears committed to victimizing it and those responsible for reparation, a matter that does not do well to the prestige of a dignity that among its fundamental achievements should have the to protect the essential rights, especially the Life and Physical and Psychic Integrity of people, the main objective of the State and the first of its purposes, as contemplated in Article 1 of the current Political Constitution.

It is possible to discover a lack of regularity in the criteria to resolve on the assessment of Moral Damage, by accident or death of the victim, when comparing some local failures (Concepción, Chile).

1.- Judgment of December 7, 2004. IC Case No. 1439/2004.

Fact: Arm caught and crushed by machine.

Compensation amount $ 90,000,000.-

2.- Judgment of April 15, 2004. IC Case No. 3741/2003.

Fact: Liquid metal burn on legs.

Compensation amount $ 15,000,000.

3.- Judgment of March 31, 2003. IC Case No. 1237/2003.

Fact: Broken leg bone in accident.

Compensation amount $ 5,000,000.

4.- Judgment of July 10, 2002. Rol IC Nº. 1893/2001.

Fact: Amputation of a foot in work accident.

Amount of compensation, rises from 40,000,000 to 70,000,000 pesos.

5.- Judgment of July 13, 1998. File IC 121/98.

Fact: Loss of a leg in work accident.

Compensation amount $ 30,000,000.

6.- Judgment of July 18, 2001. Case File 1428-00 IC.

Fact: Leg fracture in rainwater chamber.

Compensation amount $ 6,000,000. (IC)

7.- Judgment of March 5, 2001. File IC 1176/2000.

Fact: Sewer fall injuries.

Compensation amount $ 5,000,000.

8.- Judgment of August 10, 2000. Case No. 1977-99 IC.

Fact: Death in hospital due to generalized infection after surgery.

Amount of compensation: $ 70,000,000 to the spouse. $ 40,000,000, to each of his two children.

9.- Judgment of August 28, 2002. IC Case No. 161-2002.

Fact: Crewmember loses upper limb at elbow. Posterior amputation at shoulder height.

Compensation amount $ 35,000,000.

10.- Judgment of December 18, 2003. IC Case No. 1703-03.

Fact: Medical malpractice in labor. Child is born with permanent absolute disability.

Compensation amount $ 100,000,000. In addition, treatment for life by the defendant Hospital Establishment.

11.- Judgment of October 22, 2004. IC Case No. 1899-04.

Fact: Worker dies in oil pond explosion.

Compensation amount $ 30,000,000 for the spouse and $ 15,000,000 for each of their children.

12.- Judgment of July 27, 2004. Case IC 4496.

Fact: Pelvic and hip trauma caused by a fall into a hole.

Compensation of $ 25,000,000 to the victim and $ 5,000,000 to the mother.

13.- Judgment of September 29, 2003. IC Case No. 5340-2003.

Fact: Road accident, with permanent sequelae.

Compensation amount rises for the benefit of the victim to $ 300,000,000. In addition to lower amounts than other actors, in a total of 40,000,000.-

14.- Judgment dated March 23, 1999. IC Case No. 1520-98.

Fact: Death of a minor due to the fall of a mast in a public square.

Amount of compensation to parents $ 25,000,000, each, plus compensation of $ 5,000,000 to each of her two siblings. Total $ 60,000,000.

15.- Judgment of December 2, 2003.- The Appeal is declared inadmissible. Appeal declared inadmissible º7 of January 2005. Case IC Nº 419 - 2004.

Fact: Injuries in road accident, with permanent consequences.

Amount of compensation $ 80,000,000, to the victim.

By no means are so many proven examples necessary. This judicial situation is recognized throughout the world where there is no existence of scales or tables, officially accepted as representative of the application of the majority doctrine, which recognizes the possibility of giving value or price to human life.

8.- Comprehensive repair of the damage.

Article 1556 of the Chilean Civil Code, as understood by the majority doctrine and by jurisprudence, establishes the obligation to fully repair the damages. This is not expressly stated, but it is inferred from the provision itself who states that compensation includes consequential damage and loss of earnings, without making any distinction between patrimonial and extra-patrimonial damage. A powerful reason for hermeneutics holds that when the legislator does not distinguish, it is not lawful for the interpreter to distinguish.

But, beyond that, we must understand that the nature of the human person is physical and psychic, and that their legal assets are material, but also immaterial, among the latter being the damages that the person suffers in their internal aspect where they are. the feelings and emotions necessary to give a sense of everything to the dual existence of the human being.

Life is in itself a legal good. Even more so, the largest of the goods where all the others are integrated, ranging from personal freedom to dignity and personal rights such as name, identity and heritage.

The commented article says:

Art. 1556. Compensation for damages includes consequential damages and loss of earnings, whether they arise from not having fulfilled the obligation, or having been imperfectly fulfilled, or from having delayed the fulfillment.

Except in cases where the law expressly limits it to consequential damage.

All of the above, however, does not satisfy the primary question of how much Human Life is worth. In this regard, different methods have been formulated to calculate the value. One of them is expressed in purely economic terms, since a person in life is a probable producer of goods and services, his value would be equivalent to what he can produce during his useful time.

In addition, by the way of being absolutely utilitarian and materialistic, this formula is discriminatory, since there is a large sector of people who are not in a position to produce, such as the elderly, children, the disabled, who in this way could not give a compensatory value to Life.

For their part, the moralistic doctrines express their refusal to recognize Human Life as a value independent of Moral Damage. As previously expressed, human life integrates all attributes and rights, consequently there would be no reason to value Human Life outside of the concept of Moral Damage.

These ideas lead us to an analysis outside the strictly legal frameworks and takes us through the paths of philosophy and metaphysics, which is not the subject of comment, but which is convenient to mention, since it forgets all the advance of law international recognition of Human Life as an independent legal asset and with a value per se, and this legal asset and its value has been widely recognized and accepted in the modern legal world and the law protects and protects it. In effect, in the constitutional guarantees recognized by the Political Constitution of the Republic, article 20 grants the Resource of Protection of the violated guarantees, among them the Right to Life and physical and mental integrity.

The conception that gives value to human life for its productive capacity, is discriminatory, like any formula that overvalues the adjectives of the human being and not its essence. The aforementioned Argentine author adheres to this way of appreciating the problem by pointing out that: "what can never be compensated can be the" life value "but, more closely, the" lost values ", which to some that life reported before ceasing and that they fail as of that moment ”(p. 23, ob.cit.) Consequently with this doctrine, its position is that the patrimonial and extra-patrimonial damages should be prosecuted by the action“ iure proper ”.

9.- Jurisprudence and Comments.

Role 309-2006

Work accident. Moral damage of worker is non-transferable. Compensable items

Supreme Court Fourth Chamber (Special)

June 27, 2007

Eighth: That in a second order of ideas, once the origin and nature of the claim in the case have been established, it is necessary, in order to elucidate the question under discussion, to address the problem that arises when the holder of the action referred to in the previous reason, dies as a result of the work accident and, therefore, whoever demands the payment of compensation for the anguish and moral pain suffered by the worker is his heir.

This is due to the fact that although the transferability, like the transfer, is not the subject of doubts regarding the compensation action for property damage, since it is incorporated into the patrimony of the deceased, according to articles 951 II and 1097 of the Civil Code, as it is an extra-patrimonial detriment, due to its very nature, the fact that a third party can claim compensation through hereditary means has been questioned in doctrine and jurisprudence.

Ninth: That the situation explained, therefore, places the court in the need to decide if the action in question is or is not transferable and if it is, under what conditions, having to reason for it, as different authors warn of the national doctrine, regarding the type of right that emanates from the corresponding breach and the nature of the respective reparation, considering, furthermore, that in the event of an affirmative answer, an accumulation of compensation may be generated, since the successor is empowered to act before the ordinary courts, invoking their own pain for the loss of the worker's person and obtaining an independent reparation that is recognized by hereditary means.

Tenth: That, as regards the first two parameters alluded to, relative to the quality of the claim that is exercised and the nature of the compensation that it demands, it is a priority to record the close and undeniable link between the two as soon as the latter is generated and justified in the affliction of the affected worker, which gives a very personal character to the first one that cannot be distorted by the fact that it gives rise to a credit in money, because even integrating said patrimonial element, the meaning and content of the action under study it remains unalterable, since what it seeks is to compensate for the ill endured by the victim, personally.

This is the one that has been injured in a personal, extra-pecuniary interest, which is part of the spiritual integrity of a person, and which occurs as a result of the infringement or ignorance of a right when the infringement act expands to the internal sphere of the victim or the persons linked to her (Arturo Alessandri, On Tort Liability in Chilean Civil Law, Editorial Universitaria, 1943).

In this way, the aforementioned objective is only fulfilled, then, when the reparation is delivered to the one who suffered the pain, the annoyance or the affliction in his feelings or spiritual faculties.

Commentary.

We must recognize that the Court assumes that by opting for the position of the transferability of the most personal rights, the door could be opened to the generation of an accumulation of compensation. It is not a question, then, of a legal matter itself, but of the policy of administration of cases. In addition, it maintains that the non-pecuniary damage of the victim only belongs to his intimate sphere, which prevents it from being transmitted to his heirs. On the other hand, the sentence emphasizes compensation as a victim's own right and that it is only up to her to ask and obtain. In this sense, it seems to deny the possibility that very personal rights can be transmitted. However, we can analyze the following case, to prove otherwise: A worker is seriously injured as a result of a work accident. Despite,of his injury manages to straighten claim for compensation for damages. It happens that initiated the trial dies as a result of the injuries suffered. This patrimonial damage, of a very personal nature, is undoubtedly transferable to his heirs. Why is it not, if it cannot sue? What is the difference regarding the loss of life? Well, none, because the mere fact of the lapse between the accident and death does not change, the fate of the loss of life-value, as an independent legal asset and consequently transferable to its corresponding cause. There is a transfer of "being", which is the exercise of life, to "not being", which is the non-existence, the disappearance of the human essence.This patrimonial damage, of a very personal nature, is undoubtedly transferable to his heirs. Why is it not, if it cannot sue? What is the difference regarding the loss of life? Well, none, because the mere fact of the lapse between the accident and death does not change, the fate of the loss of life-value, as an independent legal asset and consequently transferable to its corresponding cause. There is a transfer of "being", which is the exercise of life, to "not being", which is the non-existence, the disappearance of the human essence.This patrimonial damage, of a very personal nature, is undoubtedly transferable to his heirs. Why is it not, if it cannot sue? What is the difference regarding the loss of life? Well, none, because the mere fact of the lapse between the accident and death does not change, the fate of the loss of life-value, as an independent legal asset and consequently transferable to its corresponding cause. There is a transfer of "being", which is the exercise of life, to "not being", which is the non-existence, the disappearance of the human essence.the fate of the loss of life-value, as an independent legal asset and consequently transferable to its holders. There is a transfer of "being", which is the exercise of life, to "not being", which is the non-existence, the disappearance of the human essence.the fate of the loss of life-value, as an independent legal asset and consequently transferable to its holders. There is a transfer of "being", which is the exercise of life, to "not being", which is the non-existence, the disappearance of the human essence.

This legal good can and should be appreciable in current money, insofar as it integrates the assets of the person as well as incorporates, immaterial or extra-patrimonial good, such as dignity, honor, physical and mental integrity. Duality, the latter fully recognized in art. 19 No 1, of the Constitution of the Republic and in the Pact of San José de Costa Rica, Treaty adopted by Chile.

The Political Constitution establishes a much broader concept of what the protected legal asset is, from the beginning of its discussion, according to the official Acts of the Study Commission, session No. 89, by holding that it is justified as a Constitutional guarantee “By virtue of the contempt that currently has affected her, committing crimes of the most diverse nature against her. Furthermore, the sacrifice that has been made of it is considered secondary and even instrumental when other values are exalted "

Coinciding with the provisions of art. 1 of the Fundamental Charter, the jurist Ángela Vivanco Martínez, in the work “20 years of the Chilean Constitution”, (Finis Térrea University, 2001, ConoSur Ltda.), States: “First of all, human life is object of protection constitutional from conception, since from that moment we are in the presence of a human being who meets all the qualities and requirements of such, regardless of the fact that he has not yet developed all the potentialities of man, and that therefore already has the quality of person, which makes him be recognized as worthy and deserving of constitutional protection ”, quoting Joaquín Arces and Flores-Valdés). Next, the author reflects as follows, referring to article 1 of the Chilean Magna Carta:“It is indicated that the State is at the service of the person, it is necessary that life not only be an object in a negative sense, sanctioning any attempted act or omission, but that the State is made responsible for its promotion and this must be understood, for example, designing state policies that improve people's quality of life or that deal with the most remote sectors of society ”. Everything that leads us to understand that the superior, unique and irreplaceable good, Human Life, is a special good, per se, part of the duality present in the species and known as "psychic-somatic duality."design state policies that improve people's quality of life or deal with the most remote sectors of society ”. Everything that leads us to understand that the superior, unique and irreplaceable good, Human Life, is a special good, per se, part of the duality present in the species and known as "psychic-somatic duality."design state policies that improve people's quality of life or deal with the most remote sectors of society ”. Everything that leads us to understand that the superior, unique and irreplaceable good, Human Life, is a special good, per se, part of the duality present in the species and known as "psychic-somatic duality."

Everyone has the right to have their life respected. This right will be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one can be deprived of life arbitrarily. (Pact of San José de Costa Rica)

Art. 951. A deceased person succeeds in a universal or singular title.

The title is universal when the deceased succeeds in all his assets, rights and transferable obligations, or in a quota of them, such as half, third or fifth.

The title is singular when it occurs in one or more species or certain bodies such as such a horse, such a house; or in one or more indeterminate species of a certain genus, like a horse, three cows, six hundred strong pesos, forty bushels of wheat.

Art. 1097. The assignees in universal title, with whatever words they are called, and although in the testament they are classified as legatees, they are heirs: they represent the person of the testator to succeed him in all his transmissible rights and obligations.

The heirs are also liable to testamentary charges, that is, those that are constituted by the will itself, and that are not imposed on certain people.

2.- Role 2801-2006

Responsibility of the State. Lack of service due to the action of Carabineros. Non-pecuniary damage to an infant.

Appeals Court of Concepción

May 07, 2007

13.- That regarding the non-pecuniary damage that the judge of first instance did not award to the child Felipe Morales Avilés, married son of the injured José Raúl Morales Martínez (pages 33), to the judgment of the sentencing judge, that the one-month-old infant the date of the wrongful act - could not perceive the facts on which the claim is based, the sentence, in this part, will be revoked and compensation will be regulated for this indirect victim, bearing in mind that it is (the child) a person, (article 55 and 74 Civil Code) that even when he is not aware of his rights, he has them; and thus he has a material and moral patrimony, and it is his moral patrimony that is affected by the damage to the physical integrity of his father.

It is known that even the fetus in the womb suffers and the anguish and sorrow of its parents (also their joys and joys) affect it.

The moral damage of Felipe Morales Avilés does not require proof, his condition as the son of the direct victim is sufficient. The kinship presumes its damage.

Commentary.

In our opinion, this ruling contains an important contribution from jurisprudence, since, from its reading, it appears that a child who is not fully aware of the harmful facts, should be compensated insofar as he is the holder of a material and moral patrimony affected by the death of his father. In other words, extending the significance of the decision, it is not necessary a full intellectual capacity to assess the loss. The sole circumstance of attacking the essential elements of the human person, such as their goods and affections, gives rise to reparation. Consequently, we must follow the same path in the face of the mentally disabled or other people who, due to their condition, cannot see the seriousness of the damage. They are manifested in the person even in those cases. This jurisprudence,It leads us to understand that "human life" has value in itself, not insofar as it relates to its productive capacity, but as a perceptible legal asset for others although, perhaps, it does not have it of itself.

3.- Role 16-2007

Moral damage. Elements to determine the quantum of compensation in the absence of objective parameters

Court of Appeals of La Serena

April 10, 2007

To determine the quantum of compensation (of non-pecuniary damage), in which the court is sovereign to determine it, and in the absence of objective parameters that serve as a sufficient basis to make it fair and equitable, it is necessary to take into consideration elements such as following:

that the damage must be fully repaired; that it is prudent to avoid global compensation and seek a separate and justified weighting of the compensation items; that macro and macroeconomic considerations must be taken into account, which allow not only to be considered in compensation the degree of economic development of the country, the particular situation of the victim and of the person obliged to make reparation; that at the same time, the statistics derived from the amount of compensation that have been set by the courts of justice must be observed, with the In order to standardize decisions for similar situations, and that all these elements must be estimated as tables or scales for moral damages in their determination by the jurisdictional bodies.

Commentary:

Any action that distinguishes human beings by qualities, whatever they may be, constitutes an act of discrimination that attacks article 19 No. 2 and the concept of human dignity of No. 4, both of the Constitution, and article 2 of the CT, in addition to the International Treaties in force that promote equal rights. Human life is exactly the same in its ethical-philosophical value, both for the employer and for the worker. For the President of the Republic, as for the humblest of citizens. There is no difference of qualities in the essential matter of Life. This cannot be confused with external adjectival circumstances or living conditions, all of which are alien to intrinsic value. In such a way that it cannot affect the quantum, the fact that the injured or deceased was rich or poor, man or woman, atheist,Christian or Jewish, or any other adjective circumstance.

Letter c) of the sentence clearly emphasizes aspects that conflict with current provisions on equality, dignity and non-discrimination.

4.- Role 4825-2003

Moral damage. Holders of the share. Transmissibility

Court of Appeals of Concepción

April 26, 2006

26.- That Luz Isabel Alarcón Durán, María Ángela, Rita del Carmen, Juana Cecilia and Bernarda Anuñir Marileo, have collected, as heirs, the moral damages of the deceased Tania Mendoza Alarcón (the first) and Manuel Aniñir Epullán (the others).

Resolving in our country whether the exercise of the action for reparation of non-pecuniary damage by the heirs of the direct victim ex persona defuncti is admissible, regardless of the action that they may have in law, has not been a matter of peaceful solution.

However, as the author Carmen Domínguez Hidalgo points out (El Daño Moral, Volume II, Editorial Jurídica de Chile, page 731), the transferability of the action for non-pecuniary damage not exercised by the deceased does not seem to be discussed at present.

And he adds: Its highly personal nature is not uniformly admitted, because it has an obvious economic content, since the reparation will have to be translated into monetary compensation, except in cases of other forms of reparation, for example the right to honor, which also do not exclude the financial compensation.

And, ultimately, there are no technical objections to submitting it to the general system of the transferability of the rights and actions of the deceased.

In comparative Latin law, this is an issue that at present no longer deserves doubts and that is the doctrine followed in our Law (he quotes Alessandri, Tort Liability in Chilean Civil Law, No. 386; Domínguez Águila and Domínguez Benavente, Succession Law, Volume I, No. 99; and José Bidart Hernández, Subjects of the Action for Tort Liability, pages 86 and following), following the common succession principles, since the issue is not expressly resolved in the law.

Article 2.315 of the Civil Code, which could be invoked as a text that decides the problem in favor of transferability, only refers to the damage caused to things and not that which occurs to people.

But, the majority sector of the doctrine that follows the thesis of transferability, makes a distinction: if the victim of the crime or quasi-crime died instantly or after it. Alessandri (work already cited, Nº 388) says: In the first case, the heirs cannot exercise it. As the victim died at the same time of the accident, the action that could correspond to him was not incorporated into his patrimony and could not, therefore, be transmitted. They could only exercise their own action, that is, that derived from the personal damage that death has caused them.

Abeliuk (Las Obligaciones, Volume I, Editorial Jurídica de Chile, Nº 251 III) states: Now, in the damage to persons, doubtful cases can arise if the victim dies; Of course, the situation in any kind of damage is excluded if the affected person perishes after the illicit act, but without having received compensation. This is perfectly transmissible.

We are referring to the case in which you die as a result of the wrongful act; if he survives him, even if he dies later, the situation is the same as the previous one, but if death is instantaneous, he transmits nothing to his heirs, because nothing has been acquired.

This has also been resolved, since ancient times, by our jurisprudence, as can be seen in the ruling of the Highest Court, published in Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, volume 27, Sect. 1st, p. 822).

It is true that some, the least, affirm that moral damage is not only limited to suffering, but also includes, more broadly, the deprivation of the right to life, that is, what is repaired is not the fact of pain that It is experienced by being aware of the loss of life, but rather the deprivation of it, as an essential right of the person, recognized by Article 19 No. 1 of the Constitution (Pablo Rodríguez Grez, Extra-contractual Responsibility, Editorial Jurídica de Chile, pages 360 and following).

Nobody disputes that life is a higher value, guaranteed constitutionally, but from this it cannot be concluded that a right to reparation can be born for the victim who loses it. To admit an action in said case would only imply conceiving the compensation as a sanction or penalty and not even in favor of the victim, in addition to an enrichment without any justification of the heirs (Carmen Domínguez, work mentioned above, pages 733 and following);

Commentary.

The enrichment of the ruling with the different positions makes it interesting and didactic. However, the cited author is based on the existing bibliography that assumes that death, although it is a higher value, its reparation per se, would constitute an indemnification of a punitive and non-reparatory nature, in addition, an enrichment without cause for the heirs.

The detractors of the theory of the intrasmissibility of the most personal rights base their position on a metaphysical consideration, death is the end of all rights and obligations. However, we know that this is not the case. It may be about the holding or the exercise of rights, but this is only one of the powers that the law grants. In fact, the Law protects the human person from before it has been perfected and obtained its independence from the womb.

In the same way, inheritance rights are a recognition of the economic consequences and of the transferability of rights, after death. In many cases it is clear that death is a slow and painful process. Furthermore, even in sudden deaths we cannot fully discern how sudden and how fast it has been. Hence the reason for the old Athenian wisdom teaching, that the hare can never catch up with the tortoise. We are talking about the infinity of time and spaces.

But does this proposition really matter? Perhaps, in a lucubrative tenor, but the reality is that it is not death that matters, but rather the meaning of life and its significance that is lost in an illicit act, whether or not a subjective or objective attribution factor intervenes.. The life of the victim has been affected, but its value per se, that is, the value of life itself has been transmitted to his heirs, insofar as it is valuable to them.

In this sense, life is not a tradable good like furniture or real estate. Life is worth by itself and is an invaluable form of moral and spiritual wealth. Consequently, only the Judge can, according to his prudence, appreciate it in its magnitude.

From what has been said, it is also understood that in no case an assessment of Life independent of the proper ius, can incausibly enrich the heirs, because, its moral and spiritual significance, allows admitting that it is a good that is in the patrimony of the causer like any other. Deploying a classicist theory at the beginning of the third millennium does not adjust to the needs of social, economic and legal dynamics, since society, to the extent that it increases risks, must increase the protection and recognition of the essential values of the individual, protect and recognize them in their natural environment: The Family, who assumes as heir the estate of the deceased.

5.- Role 1286-2003

The compensable non-pecuniary damage takes into consideration both the suffering of the pain and the legal non-patrimonial interests

Supreme Court Fourth Chamber (Special)

August 30, 2004

Compensable non-pecuniary damage not only considers the concept of pretium doloris or feelings of pain, but also involves other lawful and non-patrimonial interests such as bodily integrity and health, which for their origin and determination must meet certain requirements of precision and be proven by who alleges them, which otherwise make it impossible to determine the existence of true and effective damage.

6.- Supreme Court

Art. 2314 CC, 2315 CC, 2316 CC, 2317 CC, 2329.-

DATE

08/11/1998 ROL 2460-98 (Valparaíso)

II. The statement implies a refusal that exempts him from responsibility, however, these exceptions, together with the information set forth in the second recital, only allow us to reach the conclusion that the driver had a guilty participation in the fact under investigation since his statements are inadmissible., since they necessarily imply that he was driving negligently and not being attentive to the current traffic conditions; Furthermore, when the defendant saw "the cyclist zigzagging and apparently drunk", he must have anticipated that there was a certain risk in the sense that an accident could arise and did not take any precautions in this regard, which means gross negligence as far as to driving.

Neither will the defendant be heard regarding his assertion that he felt a blow to the back and did not give it importance because the vehicle had no damage; Indeed, it is incomprehensible that if he had seen precisely a drunken cyclist, zigzagging and then felt a blow, he would not even imagine that something abnormal and extraordinary could have happened and that it would have forced him, even out of curiosity, to stop his vehicle.

All of the above raises doubts that the driver was not really aware of the accident and, taking into account the circumstances of the place and time, has determined to flee the site, leaving the injured victim to their own devices, which implies a serious lack of respect for human dignity and life.

Regarding "non-pecuniary damage", it will be accessed because it is intended to repair a purely personal damage that in itself is not tradable in money and that escapes all possibility of pecuniary evaluation such as pain due to the death of a relative as close as the deceased with the actors.

Given the above, the regulation of the damage must be handed over to the prudential regulation of the Court, which in this case estimates it in the single and total sum of seven million pesos without interest or readjustments.

Commentary.

Human Life cannot be underestimated.

This implies a terrible message for those who are in the care of other people, for life in society and for social peace. In general, we know that there is a General Duty of Care, its formal and substantive recognition and application, it is absolutely necessary in today's social life. Therefore, the Directors of schools; businessmen; Corporations, etc., must assume their real responsibility in the care of other people. The loss of any loved one is not compensated by money. In this way, compensation is meaningless.

Therefore, the true meaning of compensation is to seek a material palliative that allows the injured person to rediscover peace and moral rehabilitation in medicine, recreation or oblivion. The only ways to alleviate the pain of the death of a loved one.

10.- Other approaches to the valuation of human life.

The opposite to the economistic position sees man as the meeting point of a multiplicity of material values, but also spiritual or psychic ones, understanding in our view the dual concept of Human Life and pointing out that it is not exhausted in mere material considerations that surround it and that although it is true, they are present, other fully recognizable extra-patrimonial values are in the same way.

More directly, there is the doctrine of the full recognition of Human Life as a measurable legal value in money, consequently it can be compensable by itself, unrelated to all other considerations, such as the effects that are framed in the concept of Moral Damage. That is, it not only has the possibility of compensation, but also of being inherited, finding the fact that indeed, there are those who believe that Human Life is worth by itself and the action can be exercised by successors (iure hereditatis).

Reasons have been given to deny the Value of Human Life as an independent legal good:

It is said that Life is not an asset in itself and that it is not among the compensable assets When compensation is viewed from the side of the victim's death, it is expressed that this, death, is not a legal asset that can sets up an injury to the deceased person.

Consequently, it follows that he cannot acquire a right that can be transmitted to his heirs.

All of the above collides with the fact that if patrimonial values are compensable, why not human life, as value per se? Perhaps, we could ask, when the person dies, does not all possibility of exercising their essential rights end and a chance of life ends and the victim does not feel the suffering of her own death? It is true that with death all rights are terminated, but those acquired during life, and the one received at the time of death, is constituted as a compensable legal asset in accordance with current substantive legislation.

It would be enough for the deceased to have exceeded in one thousandth of a second, the time of death, for the rights and powers to act for them to have entered their patrimony. Another thing is that after death he can do so, but at that moment, he already acquired them to deliver them to his heirs, who in his name and representation can claim them, as the law recognizes that the deceased survives in his heirs.

It is more reasonable and legal, to suppose that all Damage that means a form of aggression to Human Life, also attacks the registration of all its rights, which emanate precisely from Life, and as a consequence of it, at that very moment, contemporaneously, arises the right of this person to be compensated. The opinions that do not agree with this position of recognition of the current social reality and its interrelation with man, give the perpetrator an advantage that, however, does not have, who only injures or disables, therefore, it would be convenient to kill or let die to Before allowing a person to stay alive, then, dead, he will no longer have any right, patrimonial or extra-patrimonial, for which the perpetrator must answer, which is an absurdity difficult to bear and adopt,especially if it is understood that any Damage that offends a legitimate interest of the person is compensable, and there is no other of greater scope than Life itself, framed within the concept of the Duty not to Harm or alterum non laedere.

11.- Money as a measure of human life.

The value of the person emerges from his dignity as a human being, from being an end in himself, regardless of the individual circumstances with which he has come to this world. They only determine their possibilities and talents, but already the dignity of being the son of a man and a woman has reached its full development and the form and essence of this great dignity has matured. For this reason it is sustainable that every person is worth by himself, regardless of the circumstances of his birth, origin, sex, color and other qualities of the human being, and his value as his essence, have been widely recognized in the most distant places on the planet. Byzantine would be to take up this discussion at the height of the third millennium. Today, what concerns us is to also give dignity to the human person when, for special reasons,Life must be encrypted in order to establish the certainty of the rights of the parties in a trial, never as a social or economic principle

All people have a value, without any exception, but not just any value, but the value that is constitutive of them as such a person. Put in another simpler way: Every person is worth by the fact of being a person, a special individual in the species, with their own characteristics among billions, and that constitutes them unique and unrepeatable beings, consequently, this psychic and somatic individuality, can be valued as an entity independent of its attributes.

If our society were characterized by its complete solidarity with the victims, surely this type of disquisition would be meaningless. But, on the contrary, when society is competitive, it must accept as a budgetary basis that everyone must compete on equal terms. In the event of injury, disability resulting from fault or from the objective relationships of the risks created by third parties, the individual is, as a consequence of the result, absolutely limited in their possibilities of competition before other individuals. The way to repair damages using money as a measure is widely accepted in all laws regarding all kinds of goods. Why not regarding Human Life as a damaged legal asset?

In our legislation, compensation for damages is merely compensatory. There is no penalty for this route. It is a matter of recognizing as a fact that it is not possible to restore or return to the situation or state prior to the Damage, the person, at least, allow his heirs to bear the pain by taking for himself the time that is necessary in the search for its appeasement, by way of recreation so that the harmful event does not even remain in memory and there is full restoration of peace for the person or persons affected by the damage, which is also understandable from the point of view of "doing Justice" versus the result.

Another very strong argument in favor of the doctrine of iure hereditatis is related to the following fact. It is not about appreciating the death of a person as the end of the rights of the victim. This, because death is the consolidation of all those who are transmittable to their heirs. Death is not the cause of death, it does not exist by itself, but as a consequence of something. In this reflection, it is possible to analyze a cause - effect action, in which death is the result or effect of an action or a fact. Never the cause of it.

From the legalistic perspective, death produces clear legal effects: First, what has been said with the wrong intention of not recognizing its uniqueness, death puts an end to the existence of the person, but, let's say it once, at once, visible, social, to the human person. Secondly, it begins the automatic transfer without delay of the transfer of assets due to death to those who at that moment are called by law to assume the continuity of the deceased in all their rights and obligations. In the third, arises the right to have the loss of life value recognized and the right to be compensated for said loss.

This reflection is important, since there are activities of the human being with characteristics of maximum risk and are all those derived from productive activities such as mining, construction, fishing, forestry, construction, transportation, where each day there are higher annual figures of deaths due to trauma, falls or bumps. In the vast majority of these cases, the deceased do not die instantly as a result of the impact or the accident and it is evident that before dying these people have suffered great moral damage, as a result of the perception of the proximity of their existence.

In the case of Judgment Rol 309-2006, of June 27, 2007, of the Excma Court, the worker died after falling into the water from the fishing boat and fighting desperately, in the sight of his co-workers, to save himself, which was impossible due to the speed of the ship and the weather condition. In these situations, it is reasonable to think that before death the person of the deceased has had to suffer enormously, causing Moral Damage that has entered his estate, since the Moral Damage is recognized in money, therefore, transmissible.

Can this situation be generalized? In our understanding, the question we should ask ourselves is, can we understand where is the instant of separation between the life and death of the deceased? If we cannot give an objective and scientific answer in this regard, in addition, proven in judgment, we must necessarily suppose that between these two instants there is a problem of infinity, since time and spaces, at least theoretically, can be divided into infinity.

Therefore, limiting the right of representation of the causer in some events and allowing it in others is an unbearable anachronism. Regarding compensation for the Moral Damage of the deceased, the damage suffered by the human person, who lives and exists, upon death, is due to the fact of death. Hence, the reasons have a double or triple alternative and are not always bogged down in a single possibility, especially in the field of Law, since this discipline is also transformed with the passage of science, technology, the increase in innovations that increase the risks of living in society and, permanently delivering, a renewal of ideas, in order to apply the Law, the most in accordance with reality.

Denying this possibility would mean a mockery of International Law and the Treaties signed by our country, but fundamentally, an incongruity with the offended or victim, who, due to an erroneous interpretation of the most personal rights, cannot transmit to their heirs who represent them in the debts and obligations and as the active holder of the compensation action, leaving the wrongful act that caused his death without civil penalty.

12.- Where is “our” Law oriented?

a.- Introduction to the topic.

After attending a course organized by the School of Law of the University of Concepción; internationally recognized for the excellence of illustrious teachers whom we admire for their dedication, lucidity and knowledge, and who, due to these merits, become rectors of lawyers and judges, in doctrine and in the interpretation of the Law; A question has arisen that I wish to express in order to originate, if not, a discussion, at least for me, a catharsis, moreover, because it is directly related to what we stated above.

In other words, on what bases do we apply the Law to the practical case? It is not a matter of legal interpretation, since it is solved according to the forms that the Law itself indicates. It is about being able to resolve the issue of whether the law is protective or only a set of rules that regulate the actions of individuals, regardless of the particular situation of each one of them.

The topic does not cease to be important since the autonomy of the will, typical of Civil Law, is attenuating the differences between the managers of the legal business due to the influence of the rules of Public Law, invasive of the broad fields of contractual freedom, invoking the need for fairer and more equitable relationships.

It cannot be denied that the rules of Public Law, especially those of a Constitutional nature, have put a limit to such an extensive scope, today absolutely counterproductive for social interests. Professor Jesús Alfaro Aguila-Real, from the Autonomous University of Madrid, points out:

“An argument from authority, to begin with. ZÖLLNER, one of the most reputable German dogmatists, claimed that codified private law is the product not only of French revolutionary thought, but also of classical economic thought represented especially by Adam SMITH (ZÖLLNER, 1988, p. 330). And it is that, indeed, Western Private Law - and here I am referring to both common law and continental law countries - constitutes the institutionalization of the market economy. ”(InDret 1/2007)

We cannot discuss the purposes of Western law in the time of Adam Smith, but today we must add a new factor that weighs on the orientation of current Law: The recognition of International Public Law and the essential rights of man that they uphold or should sustain the basis of all legal systems. Between the French Revolution and today, there is an extraordinary reevaluation of man as an integral human being: As an individual, as a social being and as the owner of his circumstances, in which he finds a necessary and indispensable environment for his survival.

b.- Law, Economy and Society.

Since the primitive Roman Law of the XII Tables, the Law has followed its path in the purpose of obtaining the balance between the parts. If these primary norms were born precisely to provide security to citizens, it is pertinent to conclude that they were unprotected against the power of the former patricians.

In modern life these same problems have been extended instead of disappearing. The quantitative increase in the production of goods and services, together with technical and scientific advances, interrelates us with a time in which even being informed of their development, we are not allowed by the force of this, to realize how much they amount the pacts, agreements, conventions and about what new things and goods.

It could be pointed out that in any case the purchase and sale of said goods and services follows the molds of the primitive institutions, however, this would be a half-truth, in which the right to new disciplines such as economics, education is not integrated. sociology and the concepts of Ethics in the relationships of people with society and people with each other.

An indisputable example of this development is found in the separation of the concepts of real rights and personal rights. Indeed, today no one could pretend that the debtor who does not fulfill his obligation could be forced to serve in the house of his creditor until the payment of the debt or to be torn apart by his creditors. Today, we only understand the obligation as a fundamentally ethical bond, with legal consequences on the debtor's assets. In the same way, it is not possible to think that man's heritage is only made up of material goods. Finally, no one would dare to ignore the spiritual, psychic or subjective aspect of the human being.

The Law, in the face of current reality, has integrated into private legal relationships an orientation that every day deviates more from the power of the autonomy of the will and must submit to higher normative premises that are found at the top of the hierarchical pyramid: Political Constitution of the Republic. This, inasmuch as these rules are of a public nature, and are not under the free will of the parties. In effect, the Constitution limits in favor of the common good and the human person, the will on such transcendent issues as the family, the environment, the economy, real rights and possession, and even aspects of inheritance law.

An intensive study of the legal foundations of the factors that modify the orientation of the Law is not necessary. This is due in essence to the fact that the nature of the State stands in its entirety, as a protective entity of balance and harmony between individuals and of the relationships that manifest between them. In this regard, the first article of the Political Constitution states:

“The State is at the service of the human person and its purpose is to promote the common good, for which it must contribute to creating the social conditions that allow each and every one of the members of the national community their greatest possible spiritual and material fulfillment., with full respect for the rights and guarantees that this Constitution establishes. It is the duty of the State to safeguard national security, provide protection to the population and the family, tend to strengthen it, promote the harmonious integration of all sectors of the Nation and ensure the right of people to participate with equal opportunities in the national life ”.

I believe, with firm conviction, that the protection of the State is legally expressed in the fact that it recognizes that, as a supra-individual entity, its objective and purposes look to the spiritual and material fulfillment of each of the members of society, recognizing the respect for the rights and guarantees that it itself, the Constitution, establishes. It is derived, from this perception, that the Law, obviously, must respond to give the subject, the man, a perspective that allows him the fulfillment that the maximum Law gives him, because, if this did not happen, the State would be denatured and lose its function for which it was created. What makes it a Protective State of the individual, under the legal rules in force in all areas in which the Law is manifested.

In this way the interests of the individual and the interests of society are the same, acting in permanent interrelation.

c.- Ethics and Law.

When focusing on the answer to the budget question, we must admit as part of it, the circumstance if the social organization understands the law separately from ethics, or in a different way.

First of all, we must note that these are two concepts that inhabit different planes. Ethics is part of the moral standards that conform to what is generally understood as such in a given time and place. The law, on the other hand, is part of the cultural superstructure and it is a concept verifiable by its form and its empire. In this way it is not possible to understand how law and ethics could go hand in hand, if their nature is different.

However, there is a point of convergence between these concepts. It is the circumstance that both can be identified with the search for justice, a factor that is available in the nature of the human being. This is clear, then, otherwise there would not have been in the process of development of humanity, the objective of bringing the right to its optimal "should be": Justice. The law immediately ceases, through this conception, being the cold legal norm, instead, it becomes an indispensable element to find what is fair, what is ethical in the sense of value. Fraud of the Law, Abuse of Law, Simulation, Injury, among others, even prescription, are legally recognized institutions because, in themselves,They imply a transgression of moral norms that cannot be alien to the search for justice in the application of the Law. However, the greatest of all ethical transgressions are those that offend Human Life and the Physical and Psychical Integrity of the person.

13.- Conclusion.

Our thesis supports the idea that law is protective par excellence and it could not be otherwise, since its objective is to find the meaning of what is fair, even more so what is ethically fair, which is a conception of greater boundaries and more defined. What should not be taken for granted, is that in its application, this sense of protection exceeds the harmony or balances that may exist in a given society in time and place. That is, it protects against inequality, against opportunism, against abuse, against the internal and external impossibilities of an individual, to access what he considers fair, in the terms of said society, and in our case, fulfilling the objectives of the State, who has the duty to deliver the material and spiritual conditions for this to happen.The right of private parties cannot be in opposition to this idea, since no State in the world can admit that its political organization does not tend to find the foundations of an ethically correct right, as well as to deliver to its citizens the elements for the common good and the protection of the essential rights of man.

One way of understanding social democracy is to achieve the realization of important principles such as solidarity, participation, equity and integral human development, in short, respect for the other, their nature and their rights.

From another point of view, if the constitutionalization of the Law derives from the supremacy of the Constitution, as a superior hierarchical norm, to which all the others of lesser rank are subordinated, it is not difficult to conclude that the orientation of our law must go by the practical application, that is, in the concrete case, of the essential rights that this higher norm recognizes to every human person.

14.- Final Reflections

We have no doubt that Human Life is a value in itself. If this were not understood in this way, we would fall into a capital incongruity when noting that other very personal rights, such as personal and family dignity, honor, rights derived from the recognition of personality, have an independent value and consequently a quantifiable caloric treatment, in the situation of taking action for its restoration. But, this could not happen in the event that the victim of an attempt on Life died.

The doctrines that promote the recognition of Moral Damage as a substitute for Life-Value, do not always resort to justifications of a legal nature, but rather tangential, leaving this important legal asset without any evaluation.

Similarly, when third parties claim Moral Damage for the loss of a loved one, the Life-Value is not always recognized quantitatively, granting in some cases ridiculous figures or amounts, which do not send correct messages about what society wishes in these serious matters respect for the life and integrity of the other.

Jurisprudence, however, is dynamic and ends up recognizing, later rather than later, the true legal value of Human Life, and consequently, giving the correct quantification and recognizing the active heirs of the action, whether they act on their own, in the manifestation of the "proper ius", whether they do it in the name and on behalf of the person who has suffered the pain of the loss of Life, allowing, at this very moment, to flash the right to judicial recognition.

Death can only end bodily life. But, it is at the same time the moment in which the person grants to his successors, each and every one of his rights, among them, to give value to his greatest good, the basis of all his tangible and intangible heritage: Life.