CLThe article discusses the legality of the collection mechanism used by the Chilean Treasury for the State-Guaranteed Credit (CAE), which has led to significant controversy. The author argues that the Supreme Court faces a critical decision: whether the current collection process violates existing legal frameworks and constitutional guarantees, or if it validates a fast but controversial method of debt recovery against CAE borrowers. Most Courts of Appeal have ruled these judicial resources inadmissible, citing administrative avenues for challenging the collection. The Supreme Court has avoided ruling on the matter, leaving many individuals whose bank accounts were emptied without due process in a vulnerable position. The article references several laws, including Law 20.027, which outlines the procedures for collecting debts under the CAE, and highlights discrepancies between the intended legal framework and the actual implementation.
Bias read (Left): The article critiques the legal and procedural aspects of the CAE collection mechanism, suggesting that the current approach may violate constitutional rights and legal standards. It emphasizes the potential illegality of the process and criticizes the judiciary for failing to address the issue, a立场
