Original article: Hermosilla contra Hermosilla: la declaración de 1988 sobre “dignidad personal” que hoy desmiente la justicia social que decía defender In August 1988, as Chile approached the plebiscite that would determine whether Augusto Pinochet would remain in power, Revista Análisis published a segment titled “And you, why are you voting NO? ”. The question was straightforward, direct, and deeply political: why reject the continuity of the dictatorship.

Among the respondents was Luis Hermosilla, introduced as a lawyer and Secretary General of the Committee of Independents for No. His answer, viewed from today’s Chile, does not go unnoticed; it acts like a boomerang. “First of all, for a reason of personal dignity.

It is impossible to support those who have wielded power in a cruel and inhumane manner, as had never been seen in our country before. Furthermore, I believe that social progress and justice can only be achieved through the various options that open up in the democratic game. ” This statement carries its own weight.

Hermosilla spoke of “personal dignity”, social progress, justice, and democracy. It was not a trivial declaration; it was a stance against a dictatorship that sought to perpetuate its power. Yet nearly four decades later, those words clash with the current judicial and political reality of the lawyer, who has become a key figure in the Hermosilla Case.

The Hermosilla Case: The 1988 Words That Now Confront Him with His Own Discourse The Committee of Independents for No was an organization formed in 1988, led by Alejandro Hales, which gathered personalities and citizens outside of traditional party militancy to support the No option in the plebiscite on October 5. Their goal was to unite those opposing the dictatorship beyond traditional political parties, pushing for the country’s re-democratization. That was the context in which Hermosilla spoke of dignity and justice.

Therefore, the quote does not appear today as a mere archival curiosity; it acts as a mirror, reflecting a brutal contradiction. Because the lawyer who once believed that justice was achieved through democratic means is now embroiled in a case that reveals the opposite: private discussions, alleged payments, access to sensitive information, and connections within institutions where citizens expect clean rules—not shortcuts for those with good contacts. The Hermosilla Case: The Audio That Opened a Black Box To simplify, the Audio Case erupted in November 2023 when CIPER revealed a recording of a meeting between Luis Hermosilla, lawyer Leonarda Villalobos, and businessman Daniel Sauer.

In that conversation, they discussed payments to officials from the Internal Revenue Service and the Financial Market Commission. From that moment, the case evolved beyond just «Hermosilla’s audio. » The investigation expanded to include alleged crimes of bribery, tax offenses, money laundering, and other angles linked to the Factop case.

In August 2024, the 4th Criminal Court of Santiago ordered preventive detention for Hermosilla and Villalobos, who were indicted by the Public Prosecutor’s Office for bribery, tax offenses, and money laundering. Then, in January 2026, the Prosecutor’s Office filed charges in the Factop-Audio case and requested a 14-year prison sentence for Hermosilla, as well as 18 years for Leonarda Villalobos and 20 years for Daniel Sauer. This judicial journey is crucial for understanding the paradox.

It is not merely about using an old phrase as a condemnation. Hermosilla, like any accused individual, maintains his presumption of innocence until the courts determine otherwise. However, the political contrast is clear: the one who spoke of justice and democracy now finds himself at the center of a plot that directly undermines trust in those institutions.

Reformalization That Reignited His Public Attention Adding to this context, a new chapter unfolded on Monday, May 4. Following a complaint by the Internal Revenue Service, Hermosilla was reformalized for repeated tax offenses. According to the IRS’s indictment, the fiscal damages amount to $551 million, a figure that, updated to 2026, would approach $800 million.

The court maintained the preventive measures of nighttime house arrest and national arrest, setting a 60-day investigation period. This point isn’t the crux of the story, but it updates the weight of the paradox. The old declaration about “personal dignity” resurfaces just as the lawyer returns to court over yet another tax-related issue (for more details, readers can refer to the related article).

The Archives Do Not Forgive The 1988 declaration does not legally prove anything. However, it speaks volumes in political and symbolic terms. Because when a public figure invokes dignity, justice, and democracy, those words linger in memory.

And when years later, that same figure is implicated in a case that exposes alleged favors, payments, and influence in public agencies, the contradiction becomes hard to circumvent. That is the underlying issue. It is not just Hermosilla against the Prosecutor’s Office.

It is Hermosilla against himself. The Hermosilla who in 1988 invoked “personal dignity” now finds himself ensnared by his own rhetoric. For there can be no social justice when the rules seem to bend for those with power, connections, and access to institutions.

This is the paradox that the Hermosilla Case reveals: not just the fall of an influential lawyer, but the portrait of an elite that has spoken of democracy for years while making shortcuts a form of power.