Will Chile Pardon Its Police? The Case-by-Case Mercy Debate That Could Reshape Justice

Santiago, Chile, MMN Correspondent: Nearly five years after the streets of Chile erupted in the most intense civil unrest since its return to democracy, a new question is pulling the nation in opposite directions: Should the officers who used force during those chaotic days be forgiven? And if so, how?

Enrique Bassaletti, a former Carabineros general turned congressman for the Partido Republicano de Chile, has stepped into the center of this storm. He is not calling for a blanket pardon. Instead, he is asking for something far more nuanced: a case-by-case evaluation of every single conviction tied to the events of October 18, 2019. His position is drawing attention because it sits at the intersection of accountability and compassion, two forces that rarely meet in the same room.

To understand why this matters, you have to go back to the protests themselves. What began as peaceful marches for better education, healthcare, and public services quickly escalated into widespread disorder. The state responded with force. Human rights organizations documented hundreds of cases involving excessive force, unlawful detentions, and allegations of torture by Carabineros and military personnel. By 2022, more than 200 officers had been convicted, with sentences ranging from two to eight years in prison.

Those convictions split the country. Some Chileans see them as necessary justice for victims of state violence. Others view the officers as scapegoats who were following orders in an impossible situation. President Gabriel Boric, who campaigned on a promise to heal the wounds of 2019, granted pardons to several high-profile cases in early 2023. That move pleased some but angered many, especially human rights advocates who saw it as a blow to judicial independence.

Bassaletti offers a third way. He supports the idea of pardons but insists they must be earned. In his view, not every conviction was built on solid ground. He questions whether prosecutors always upheld the principle of objectivity, though he stops short of accusing the courts of bias. His focus is on the difference between an officer who acted out of malice and one who made a mistake under extreme pressure. Under Chilean law, the distinction between illegal coercion and torture hinges on intent. Bassaletti argues that lumping all cases together under a single label does a disservice to justice.

The proposed legislation currently before Congress would create a general pardon framework for those convicted in connection with the October 18 events. Bassaletti warns against it. A general pardon, he says, would imply that all conduct was equally wrong, which it was not. Instead, he envisions a law that sets clear criteria: prior disciplinary records, the nature of the offense, aggravating factors, and evidence of genuine remorse. This approach mirrors transitional justice models used in South Africa, Colombia, and Germany, where forgiveness is conditional on truth telling and reform.

Public opinion reflects the complexity of the issue. A recent survey by the Centro de Estudios Públicos found that 47 percent of Chileans support targeted pardons for officers who acted under orders, while 53 percent oppose any form of amnesty. Among former military and police personnel, support for pardons exceeds 70 percent. The numbers reveal a society still wrestling with its recent past.

Bassaletti remains hopeful. He believes pardons will happen. The real question is how they will be structured. He wants the legislative process to include input from experts, victims families, and legal scholars. His goal is not to weaken the judiciary but to allow the executive and legislative branches to contribute to a fairer resolution. If Parliament passes a carefully crafted law, he says, it could become a significant step toward national unity.

This debate is about more than politics. It is about what kind of nation Chile wants to become. Will it prioritize retribution, or will it embrace restorative justice? Bassaletti’s call for individualized consideration offers a path forward one rooted in dignity, responsibility, and the enduring value of mercy in a just society. The upcoming parliamentary session will determine whether that vision becomes law. With careful deliberation and inclusive dialogue, Chile may yet forge a precedent for reconciling justice with humanity in the aftermath of national trauma.