After 16 days of waiting: opposition files constitutional accusation against Minister Rabat

At exactly 8:00 p.m., in the middle of the Budget process, and taking advantage of the fact that many deputies were signed up to speak on the Ministry of Housing budget item, the center-left and left blocs finalized the filing of the constitutional impeachment against the Minister of Justice, Fernando Rabat. In the Inés Enríquez hall of the Chamber of Deputies, the deputies who signed the impeachment brief gathered as they waited for the head of the Socialist Party bloc, Raúl Leiva, and the bloc's coordinator, Nicolás Facuse, to arrive with the physical text. In addition to Leiva, the other signatories were the communists Marcos Barraza and Daniela Serrano, the Broad Front members Jorge Brito and Emilia Schneider, Juan Santana (PS), Luis Malla (liberal), and the members of the DC bloc, Jorge Díaz and Javier Muñoz. Although the opposition has been blamed for the delay in filing the text — which has even sparked tensions within the sector, as some insisted it should already have been done — Deputy Leiva tried to keep things calm on this day. In the announcement, the Socialist highlighted that "this is an unprecedented event that has allowed the entire opposition to come together with the legal and political conviction that we are doing the right thing, and we hope and trust that the deputies of this Chamber of Deputies will give way to it so that the constitutional impeachment can proceed." For her part, Deputy Schneider stated: "President Kast's government, through Minister Rabat, turned its back on the victims, on the victims of pedophiles and on the victims of human rights violations." And she added: "And to defend himself, he came to lie to this Chamber of Deputies. It is time for him to answer to the country and for the corresponding responsibilities to be enforced." The head of the PPD bloc, Andrea Parra, said: "Article 7 of the Constitution says that no authority may assume more powers than those the law grants it. And clearly there is a constitutional violation here. The Supreme Court never ordered Minister Rabat to make those decisions. He was indeed obligated to make decisions within the framework of the law. Not like a Supreme Court judge, who does have the power to make decisions. But as a minister." Rabat is accused of having signed the decrees that released child abusers whose sentences had been reduced, allowing their release. The tactical analysis This Thursday, in the middle of the Budget process, the opposition blocs were making their final tactical and political analyses in order to announce the impeachment brief against Rabat. Another central element in communications terms, sources in the sector confided, is that the constitutional impeachment must be a topic of conversation over the weekend. That is why, the same sources add, it is key that the text be filed during this week. Another decision they refined was who the signatories would be. However, among the center-left and left deputies, it was acknowledged that not everyone knew the text. In fact, some still recall that the constitutional impeachment against the former Supreme Court minister Ángela Vivanco underwent last-minute changes that imputed crimes to the then Interior Minister Andrés Chadwick, for which he decided to file lawsuits against some of the signatories. Among the team coordinating the text, they acknowledge that the brief is known by "those who need to know it," that is, those who will put their signatures on it before filing it at the records office. The chapters In the string of meetings the opposition held over these two weeks, it was decided that the brief would have at least three chapters. The first is based exclusively on questioning the release of those convicted of sexual offenses against minors, which would have violated child protection treaties, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. On this point, the left also argues that Rabat benefited a group of inmates with the sentence reduction and did not respect the law that entered into force in 2022, which excluded sexual offenses. Provisions of the Law on Guarantees and Comprehensive Protection of the Rights of Children and Adolescents would also have been violated. The second chapter targets the sentence reductions granted to people serving sentences for crimes against humanity. In this section, the opposition will argue that to grant this benefit to this type of inmate, the requirements of the Rome Statute must be respected, such as, for example, awareness of the harm caused and cooperation. The third chapter will include arguments alleging that Rabat would have violated his duty of integrity by providing false or imprecise information to Congress in the exercise of its oversight function. The heart of this chapter has to do with the special session of the Chamber in which Rabat spoke before the deputies. Are you already a subscriber? Log in This article is exclusive to subscribers. Subscribe to read it in full and access all our journalism. See plans