News

Senate Approves Joint Committee Report on Anti-Terrorism Law

Sponsors

With this approval, the initiative is one step away from being passed by Congress, as only the Chamber of Deputies remains to vote on the report.

With 41 votes in favor, 3 against, and 4 abstentions, the Senate Chamber approved the joint committee report that resolved the differences between the two branches of Congress regarding the law that defines terrorist acts, sets their penalties, and repeals the current law on the matter.

With this approval, the initiative is one step away from being passed by Congress, as only the Chamber of Deputies remains to vote on the report.

Prior to the vote, the chairman of the committee, Senator Iván Flores, explained the main points of disagreement that were resolved by majority in the committee. These include the incorporation of communication interception measures using tools like the IMSI catcher and the possibility of requesting a change of jurisdiction in exceptional cases of high significance.

Meanwhile, the Minister of the Interior and Public Security, Carolina Tohá, highlighted the progress represented by this new anti-terrorism law, as it not only modernizes legislation and respects individual rights but also enables the prosecution of those who commit terrorist crimes and those who prepare or organize to commit them.

DEBATE

One of the most debated points was the provision allowing communication interception using technological tools and setting deadlines for disposing of residual data. Although the measure was limited to accessing metadata (location, phone identification, etc.) rather than communication content, its scope was expanded to cover not only terrorist crimes but also drug-related offenses, arms and explosives control laws, and criminal conspiracy when punishable as felonies.

It was argued that broadening the application of this regulation could raise constitutional issues, given that the core purpose of the bill relates to terrorist crimes.

Another debated aspect was the change of jurisdiction in exceptional cases, as there is a Supreme Court recommendation advising against altering jurisdiction.

Nevertheless, lawmakers agreed that the bill represents a fundamental advancement in anti-terrorism legislation, as the current law has been ineffective, thus addressing current prosecution challenges. They emphasized that there will be proper judicial oversight in applying these rules, enabling an effective response to the increasing number of terrorist attacks recorded in the south of the country.

Regarding the change of jurisdiction, the report states:

The Public Prosecutor's Office or the defense of the accused, in cases involving crimes classified as terrorist under the law, in situations of public alarm or special complexity—provided it is deemed essential for the success of the investigation and does not substantially violate the accused's right to defense—may request, once the investigation is formalized and before the conclusion of the oral trial preparation hearing, that the Supreme Court assign jurisdiction to the Guarantee Courts and the Oral Criminal Trial Court under the jurisdiction of the Santiago Court of Appeals, following the established rotation.

On communication interception measures, it is established that in investigations of terrorist crimes, criminal conspiracy, arms control, and drug-related offenses, the Public Prosecutor's Office may request the interception of one or more telephone or mobile data transmission networks using technologies that simulate telecommunications transmission systems or other similar technologies, in order to determine, record, and monitor:

a) The IP address; MSISDN, SIM, IMEI, IMSI identifiers; or other metadata that can uniquely identify one or more devices, computer or telecommunications systems, or their components or applications in use.

b) The georeferencing or location of one or more devices, computer or telecommunications systems.

Additionally, it is specified that the order may only be granted when there are well-founded suspicions based on specific facts and that records obtained through this measure that are irrelevant or unnecessary for the investigation must be deleted from all records, databases, or electronic devices within a set timeframe.

Furthermore, the measure cannot be authorized for more than thirty days, renewable for periods of equal length, provided the required conditions persist, which must be reviewed by the judge each time.

The National Prosecutor will establish, through general instructions, the procedures for secure storage, preservation, and destruction of obtained records, as well as their use and handling. Each March, they will submit an annual report to the Senate Public Security Committee and the Chamber of Deputies' Citizen Security Committee, detailing—by regional prosecutor's office—the number of network interception requests filed by the Public Prosecutor's Office, along with the number approved and rejected.