Probably the most basic feature of civilization consists of human beings' willingness to renounce the use of force, replacing it with a set of rules that govern our coexistence. That is what our Political Constitution means when it establishes that "in Chile there are no slaves, and whoever sets foot on its territory becomes free." In our territory, no one should be subject to the will of another; among us, power is exercised in the manner and within the limits established by law. This, which seems so evident, has progressively faded as a true sign of the times. The climax was reached in October 2019, when various sectors and social actors legitimized violence based on the importance or seriousness of certain demands. If someone is convinced that changes are needed that, in their view, are very important, but are impossible through institutional channels, then the use of force would be justified. After all, they tell us that democracy—that set of rules that allows us to resolve our differences and live together in a plural society—would be just that: rules, procedures, mere formalities, which must yield to their particular notion of good or justice. Unfortunately, this is not just a trait of certain sectors; it is a logic that has permeated politics and has often, in an effort to tune in to what we call "the average Chilean," generated a climate of public lynching in which behaviors are judged, sanctions are demanded, and the anathema of our time is hurled when someone is accused of having done something "unseemly." The past few days have had much of this, in connection with the profitability of some of the pension funds. This has nothing to do with defending the Pension Fund Administrators, much less with inhibiting the legitimate right of all Chileans to criticize them, and even pursue them in the appropriate venues, with all the roughness that is inherent in a free society. But in this, and in any other case, there is one exception: that of the holders of State offices. They exercise public power, so their actions are circumscribed by the rules that regulate the power entrusted to them. Many political authorities have a representative role, they have freedom of expression and, in the case of parliamentarians, the public organ is Congress. But the boundary is diffuse, it keeps shifting, and the institution ends up being pushed beyond the limits that our legal system has conferred upon it. How many times have we seen investigative committees in which the conduct of private individuals, rather than the acts of the government, is covertly judged? On other occasions, it is the actions of some prosecutors from the Public Ministry that seem to be motivated more by a desire for prominence than by their true role. One cannot cherry-pick the rules. A just society is a society of institutions, not of vigilantes. By Gonzalo Cordero, lawyer NEWSLETTEROpinionSaturday, AMTense ideas, opposing views, and clear analysis: elements to uncover the issues that divide opinions and will shape the agenda. By subscribing, you are accepting the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policies of La Tercera.