Human Rights Watch on Sept. 2 called for [5] the Chilean National Congress to reject a proposed constitutional amendment addressing "national security" questions being pushed by President José Antonio Kast. HRW charged that the amendment, supposedly aimed at fighting organized crime, would undermine due process and human rights protections.
Multiple committees in both houses of Congress will deliberate on the amendments [7]. In the Senate, the Public Security Committee and National Defense Committee have been tasked with reviewing the proposals, while the Chamber of Deputies has referred the bill to its relevant committees for parallel review. Terms of the amendments would allow for a 240 day state of emergency without legislative approval. They also allow the president to suspend the right of assembly and other personal freedoms. Additionally, measures allow for the seizure of personal property without normal due process.
HRW criticized the proposed constitutional amendments as in direct contravention of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) [8] and the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) [9], both of which Chile is a state party to.
Article 4 of the ICCPR allows for parties to deviate from the convention in certain emergency situations. Article 27 of the ACHR requires "war, public danger, or other emergency that threatens the independence or security of a State Party," to suspend the rights included. In a speech given [10] by President Kast back in April, he listed organized crime as a national emergency. After reviewing the facts on the ground, HRW determined that the specific factual matrix of the situation did not warrant the strict legal thresholds required under international human rights law, and therefore did not meet the specific criteria outlined in the relevant conventions.
Last year, the US State Department [11]considered Chile a high threat for crime, a assessment that is reflected in the country’s travel advisory. The advisory found that violent crime hadsbeen on the rise in the past 10 years and urged American tourists to exercise caution when visiting.
However, a prominent constitutional law professor at the University of Chile, Benjamín Alemparte, disagreed [12]with Kast’s assessment of the situation in the country. He noted that Chile is far from an institutional collapse, despite Kast depicting the government as incapable of maintaining order under ordinary powers. While this statement concerned different legislation, the message warned against using security and administration issues as a pretext for centralizing power.
To amend the Chilean Constitution [13], both houses of the legislature need to pass the bill with special majorities- either two-thirds or three-fifths depending on the measure. Then they must be signed by the president. If vetoed, Congress may override the veto with a supermajority.
From JURIST [14], Sept. 2. Used with permission.
