Predsednikove pomilostitve: sedanje omejitve in nova omejitev, ki jo nameravajo določiti opozicijski poslanci

Chile’s legislative chamber will vote this Monday on a constitutional reform proposal aimed at limiting the power of President José Antonio Kast to grant individual pardons, specifically in cases involving crimes against humanity. The initiative was introduced by opposition lawmakers in December 2025, including Daniella Cicardini, Lorena Fries, Daniel Manouchehri, Vlado Mirosevic, Helia Molina, Javiera Morales, Alejandra Placencia, and Héctor Ulloa. According to the legislators, the proposed amendment seeks to explicitly restrict the president's authority to pardon individuals convicted of such crimes. The measure would add a clause to Article 32 N°14 of the Constitution, which currently allows the executive to issue pardons under conditions set by law. The current legal framework permits the president to grant pardons in cases where a court judgment has become final. However, these pardons do not erase the crime or eliminate the conviction, but rather allow for forgiveness, reduction, or substitution of the penalty being served. This authority is regulated by Law N°18.050, which outlines specific requirements related to the duration of the sentence, recidivism, and the nature of the offense. In certain cases, the president can bypass some of these requirements through a supreme decree based on specific grounds. Existing restrictions include a prohibition on granting pardons to those convicted of terrorism-related offenses. The new proposal aims to extend this limitation to crimes against humanity. Despite the introduction of the bill, it remains in its initial stage of the constitutional process and awaits approval by the full Chamber of Deputies. The Constitutional Committee rejected the initiative in January 2026, leaving the decision ultimately with the full chamber. For the proposal to pass, it must secure support from four-sevenths of the deputies currently in office. The debate over the limits of presidential pardoning powers continues to highlight tensions between executive authority and constitutional constraints, particularly concerning international commitments regarding human rights. Carolina Tohá, former Minister of the Interior, criticized the government’s security agenda during an interview with Radio Infinita, suggesting that some proposals are designed more to generate political controversy than to address real issues. She argued that while there are areas where collaboration is possible, other initiatives appear deliberately crafted to provoke polarization. Tohá pointed to the government’s push to institutionalize a high-security regime within the Constitution, noting concerns that this could undermine existing laws and create uncertainty about their validity. She warned that time spent on such measures could detract from efforts addressing more pressing matters. Tohá also raised concerns about a proposal to extend the detention period for undocumented migrants from five days to 180 days. She emphasized the potential complications of such a policy, highlighting the lack of judicial sentencing and the poor conditions in detention facilities. She noted that many within the government have expressed apprehension about implementing this change, acknowledging the complexity involved in managing such a shift effectively. Additionally, Tohá addressed the recent disorganization within the administration, citing the admission by Biminister Claudio Alvarado that he was unaware of the government’s decision to challenge a regulation requiring free reconnection of essential services after disasters. She expressed concern over the functioning of the Political Committee, stating that its effectiveness is crucial for governance. She suggested that merging ministries might weaken this structure further, raising questions about the rationale behind proposed changes. Tohá also responded to comments made by Gabriel Boric, who questioned whether she had helped save his administration in September 2022. She dismissed the interest in such controversies, stating they were not worth engaging with and noting how media and politics often fuel unnecessary disputes. She acknowledged credibility issues within the security sector, pointing to instances where criticism became overly harsh and contributed to public distrust.