Original article: Corte de Valdivia declara inadmisible querella del Ministerio de Seguridad Pública en su intento de aplicar Ley de Seguridad del Estado a estudiantes The Valdivia Court of Appeals has accepted a protection writ filed by the defense attorneys of Pablo Vicente Vásquez Burgos and María Jesús Madariaga Rojas, who were implicated in a case stemming from incidents in the regional capital of Los Ríos during a visit by Science Minister Ximena Lincolao. The court ruled to declare inadmissible an extension of the complaint filed by the Ministry of Public Security under the State Security Law. This ruling carries significant legal and political implications, as the court directly challenged the authority of the newly established Ministry of Public Security to invoke such criminal actions, indicating that current legislation bestows this power upon the Ministry of the Interior, not the new ministry.
This decision may spark a debate regarding the legal competencies of the new ministry concerning matters of internal security and public order. The events date back to April 20, 2026, when both defendants were formally charged with the crime of assault against authority in a detention control hearing held at the Valdivia Guarantee Court. At that time, the Ministry of Public Security was already involved through a complaint regarding the same offense.
However, two days later, the agency presented an extension of the judicial action, categorizing the incidents under Law No. 12,927 concerning State Security, an extension that was deemed admissible by the court. The defendants maintained that they were never legally notified of this decision and only became aware of the extension of the complaint during subsequent arguments before the Court of Appeals itself.
They also argued that the Ministry of Public Security lacked the active legitimacy to present such actions, considering the changes introduced by Law No. 21,730, which redefined the functions of the new ministry. In its ruling, the Second Chamber of the Valdivia Court disagreed with the guarantee judge’s reasoning and stated that the active legitimacy of the complainant should be evaluated from the moment of the complaint’s admissibility.
The court concluded that legal amendments explicitly maintained the authority to invoke the State Security Law within the Ministry of the Interior and Regional Presidential Delegates, without extending it to the Ministry of Public Security. The resolution further notes that allowing complaints from bodies lacking legal authority could jeopardize essential guarantees of the criminal process, such as the equality of arms between parties and the proper exercise of the right to defense. Consequently, the Court determined that this situation posed a threat to the individual security of the defendants, ultimately granting the constitutional protection action.
«The extension of the complaint filed by the Ministry of Public Security is declared inadmissible (…) due to lack of active legitimacy,» concludes the ruling delivered on May 8, 2026, by the Second Chamber of the Valdivia Court of Appeals.