In a session marked by long days of work and voting, the Chamber of Deputies debated and finally rejected a proposal that would change the law on the Competence of Military Courts in Chile. This proposal, which was part of a broader project on the use of force by law enforcement and public security personnel (Issue 15805).
The legislative initiative explains the use of force such as those used by the Armed Forces (FF.AA) and Public Order and Security to give effectiveness to the right. This is due to the duty of the State to protect and guarantee public order and internal security, according to the Constitution and the laws. After several votes on the articles of the project, the final text was sent to the Senate with some changes to what was proposed by the joint commissions of Citizen Security and the Constitution.
Likewise, the Chamber supported the recommendation of the joint commissions on it the principles which guides officers in the use of force. Here principles such as legitimacy, necessity, responsibility and rationality were discussed.
That project, issue 15805, aimed to regulate the use of force both for law enforcement and public security and for the Armed Forces in actions related to the internal security of the country. However, one of the most controversial points revolved around the jurisdiction of Military Courts during states of constitutional exception, the protection of critical infrastructure and other situations.
The Commission responsible for reviewing this aspect recommended that the offenses committed by soldiers in the performance of their duties be heard by the Military Courts only, during the this emergency. This proposal found defenders and detractors in the room, who expressed arguments for and against this measure.
Defenders of the amendment argued that it would provide better guarantees in the performance of the Armed Forces’ tasks in the control of public order, as well as allowing certain trial processes. However, critics considered it a “civilian standoff” that violated international standards for the protection of human rights.
The debate ended when the Chamber Board declared that the rule was not allowed, thus supporting the position of those who believed that this step moved away from the main goals of the project that. This decision was supported by a narrow majority of 72 votes for eligibility, 71 against and one abstention, showing the division and importance of this issue to the legislature.
Denying the powers of the Military Courts in certain circumstances stands as a situation that seeks to protect the basic principles of justice and human rights in the country, even in exceptional contexts. This program makes clear the importance of parliamentary debates in the arrangement of public policies that have a direct impact on society and its democratic stability.
Shots in the face
Other regulations that were also criticized by the deputies were those that would extend the exemption from liability of those in uniform. Similarly, the restriction on aiming less lethal weapons at the face, head or torso should be left out of the discussion. Although the government asked for these rules to be reinstated, through referendums, they did not receive the necessary votes.
At the same time, the legislators questioned how the commissions rejected the principle of proportionality and the article to avoid torture, as it is allowed in the Penal Code. However, this last issue was reincorporated after the votes on the project in the Chamber, with 73 votes in favor and 70 against.
Those who supported the project in the room were sure that it was developed in the processing in the united commissions, in the last few days. In his opinion, the changes to the project make it possible to provide more tools to protect order and public safety.
An opinion that is not shared by the Minister of the Interior and Public Security, Carolina Tohá. In his intervention in the debate he pointed out that none of the branches of the Armed Forces. Carabineros did not ask to have “more lax rules.” In his opinion, what is being done “makes false disputes worse and puts the Carabineros and the Armed Forces in their mouths.” requests that are not like that.
