The Chilean Constitutional Court (TC) removed Senator Isabel Allende from her position for signing a contract to sell her father's house to the state, a move deemed unconstitutional.
This decision carries significant political weight, impacting the Socialist Party and the government. The TC's ruling could further impact President Boric, potentially leading to a constitutional impeachment, although its impact on potential criminal charges remains unclear.
Legal experts offer differing perspectives on the ruling's implications. While the Constitution clearly prohibits such contracts for parliamentarians, with an immediate and unappealable sanction, the President's role in authorizing this action is a point of contention. The interpretation of whether the President's actions constitute a constitutional violation remains debated.
Some argue that the President's authorization of a contract expressly prohibited by the Constitution may constitute a clear breach, leading to potential impeachment. Others contend that unless evidence suggests a deliberate constitutional transgression, the constitutional implications are less clear-cut. The focus shifts to the political arena rather than purely legal aspects.
The TC's decision also affects an ongoing investigation into potential fraud against the state. While the court's ruling establishes a fact – the Senator's removal – the legal relevance to the criminal investigation remains minimal, given the absence of proven fraud. Different parties have opposing views on the ruling's relevance to the criminal case.
The ruling's broad effects are complex. It sets a precedent and could further expose President Boric to political repercussions, with the matter now becoming more of a political battle than solely a legal one.