Public officials with OnlyFans? The opinion of the Comptroller who analyzed whether selling sexual content violates the charge

Public officials with OnlyFans accounts: A Contraloría ruling examines whether selling explicit content violates their roles Last year, Gendarmería sought guidance from Chile’s Contraloría regarding a legal dispute involving one of its officers. The issue arose after the National Directorate of Gendarmería learned that a female officer assigned to a correctional facility had created an account on a platform offering digital content such as photos and videos of a sexual or intimate nature, accessible to the public through paid subscription. This raised concerns over whether her actions could be considered disciplinary infractions under institutional rules. Gendarmería faced a dilemma: determining whether the sale of adult content via such platforms constituted a breach of the duties associated with holding a public office, particularly the requirement to maintain a lifestyle consistent with the dignity of the position. According to the institution, the concern centered around potential damage to the organization's image or the authority of the officer herself or her colleagues. Preliminary assessments within the prison service suggested that engaging in such activity might be incompatible with serving in the institution and could hinder the fulfillment of its mission. The request was submitted to Contraloría, which conducted a detailed analysis of the case. The entity, led by Comptroller Dorothy Pérez, clarified that Article 61(i) of the Administrative Statute stipulates that each official must observe a social life appropriate to the dignity of their post. With this framework in mind, the ruling, authored by Deputy Comptroller Víctor Hugo Merino, continued by stating that the status of a public servant imposes obligations beyond the performance of job-related tasks. It emphasized that private behavior could undermine the prestige of the service, breach loyalty owed to superiors, peers, and the community, and potentially constitute a serious violation of administrative integrity. The document further referenced Article 56 of the Organic Law of General Bases of State Administration, which states that all officials have the right to freely engage in any profession, industry, commerce, or trade compatible with their position in the state administration, provided that these activities do not interfere with the faithful and timely fulfillment of their duties. The law also specifies that such work should occur outside working hours and using personal resources. Despite these clarifications, Contraloría did not provide a definitive resolution to the case. Instead, it returned the responsibility to Gendarmería, emphasizing that the circumstances described by the requesting body must be evaluated individually by the authority with the relevant disciplinary power. The decision noted that factors such as the specific situation, the role held by the affected official, and the public agency they belong to must be taken into account to determine whether a preliminary investigation or administrative proceeding should be initiated. If administrative liability were established, appropriate sanctions would follow based on the findings of the disciplinary process. The case highlights the complex interplay between personal freedoms and professional responsibilities within public service. While the law allows officials to pursue private endeavors, it also mandates adherence to standards of conduct that reflect the dignity of their positions. The lack of a clear-cut answer from Contraloría underscores the need for individualized assessments tailored to the unique context of each situation. In the absence of a binding directive, Gendarmería is left to navigate the nuances of disciplinary action based on the specifics of the case. The ruling does not offer a blanket prohibition or endorsement but instead reinforces the principle that decisions must be made with due consideration of the particularities of each scenario. The outcome of this case will depend on how Gendarmería interprets the guidelines provided by Contraloría. Whether the officer in question faces formal repercussions will hinge on internal evaluations of the evidence and the broader implications of her actions within the institution. The final determination rests with the disciplinary authority tasked with reviewing the matter.