Weeks ended marked by imbalances in the negotiation of the Naín-Retamal Law, which seeks to regulate and give more powers to the police forces. Last week the tension began between the Government and the pro-government parliamentarians to approve the project in the Chamber of Deputies. Then, on Monday, there was a tense negotiation between the ministers Carolina Tohá and Luis Cordero with the opposition senators in the Security Commission, which ended with the heads of the Interior and Justice portfolios getting up from the table in the middle of the session, after that the right did not accept the indication of the Government. Now, that the project has been approved in the Lower House, it seems to face a last instance: the Constitutional Court (TC). La Moneda warns that it will not participate in this initiative, noting that “the Government left this project behind, because it has already been voted on. Parliamentarians have the right to go to the TC, but the Executive’s agenda will advance to what follows in the next few issues of the rules of the use of force”, they point out from Palacio.
The last nine days have been complex for La Moneda. After the assassination of Sergeant Rita Olivares on Sunday, March 26, the security agenda that the Executive had been working on underwent changes both in the calendar and in its priorities. With the situation, Parliament changed its district week to vote on different laws and, among these, the Naín-Retamal bill, which -as sources from the Palace say- due to administrative issues in Congress it was not possible to make indications and that is why they called approve it, with the aim of modifying it in the Senate.
Reluctantly on the part of some deputies of the Government alliance, they approved the project as long as they could modify the articles that generated the most noise, among which article 7 stood out, which contemplated “privileged legitimate defense”. However, the same Sources revealed that they did not have the attitude that the opposition would have in the Security Commission led by Senator Felipe Kast.
In said commission, all the indications proposed by the Executive were rejected and the government’s attempt to regulate the use of force and other powers of the Armed Forces, Public Order and Security through the Code of Military Justice failed. Since the opposition wanted to regulate it by the Criminal Code, they passed the steamroller. “What we came to allege has been rejected out of hand,” said Minister Tohá before leaving the table together with Minister Cordero, in the middle of the session.
A day later, on Tuesday, the government authorities attended the Congress in Valparaíso to insist on the matters that they considered to be priorities. There they found more willingness to dialogue. At about four in the afternoon, the head of the Segegob, Camila Vallejo; the deputy minister of the Segpres, Macarena Lobos; and the ministers Tohá and Cordero, began to square with the pro-government senators to prepare a proposal to the opposition and to be able to fix matters that for them were worrisome and articles that had been approved in the commission, but for the Government they were “disproportionate”.
The document with proposals went and returned to the ruling party, and the opposition, in turn, with proposals and counterproposals, while in the Senate Chamber the legislators gave their speeches on the matter. Finally, the project remained in the Penal Code, contrary to the wishes of the Government, like many other indications. However, the Executive achieved the objective of correcting the risks of proportionality in the use of force and establishing more coherent and clear regulations regarding the cases in which the Public Order and Security Forces can use their weapons, in addition to specifying that the legitimate defense was to protect the life of the official or a third party, but not property.
On Tuesday afternoon, the proposal was approved in general in the Chamber of Deputies and Deputies with 137 votes in favor, 2 against and 2 abstentions. Then, in particular, after 18 votes, all the articles managed to cross the approval barrier.
From the Government they warned that they managed to solve their priority issues in the Senate, however, it is a project “much bigger than those articles.” pro-government parliamentarians They warned that they will take the law to the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of some norms contained in it. The first to announce it was the head of the PC bench, Boris Barrera, that same Tuesday afternoon: “We are studying the path, we have an advanced text and now we are only refining it. According to what came out of the Senate, there is unconstitutionality,” said the parliamentarian.
It was also raised by several senators from the ruling party, before the key articles were changed. The senator and president of the Democratic Revolution, Juan Ignacio Latorre, announced that he would appeal to the Constitutional Court for three articles that are “far from addressing the structural problems that afflict police institutions.” Even the senator Yasna Porovoste (DC) warned that she believes that there are articles that “they do not protect the police, they end up being prosecuted and affect the principle of legality and proportionality”.
However –as noted–from the Executive they are categorical in affirming that they will not participate in such an initiative: “The Government left this project behind, because it was already voted on. Parliamentarians have the right to go to the TC.”
Meanwhile, Senator Fabiola Campillai went even further, with a possibility that the government has not mentioned. The independent legislator warned that if the law was approved, she would request the presidential veto, “because I think it is necessary”. For his part, Francisco Huenchumilla (DC), Vice President of the Senate, was not very satisfied with the proposal that emanated from his Corporation and proposed, in case it was approved in the Chamber of Deputies and Deputies, the next: “I think that the possibility of having a veto should be studied to make an order within the text and not have contradictory issues. It is not good to legislate quickly. Especially when they are complex and difficult matters from a legal point of view,” he stressed.
