This week Congress passed a reform that will allow the Policía de Investigaciones (PDI, Chile's investigative police) to seek court authorization to enter homes and detain foreigners with final expulsion orders, according to El Mostrador. The law also cuts the deadline for filing a court challenge to five days in certain procedures.
The bill was introduced under the government of Gabriel Boric and amended by the administration of José Antonio Kast. In the Senado (Chile's Senate) it received 37 votes in favor and one abstention.
Besides home entry, the reform creates a mandatory biometric registry for adult foreigners with irregular status. It adds tools to locate them and tightens restrictions on re-entering the country.
The text expands the grounds for expulsion for serious disturbances of public order. It also sets up mechanisms to expel foreigners facing criminal proceedings for certain minor offenses, under specific conditions and with judicial oversight.
On Thursday, the Kast government signed the resolutions to expel the six foreigners detained during the October 18 incidents. One of them, a Venezuelan national, cannot be repatriated for now because of the difficulties in carrying out returns to that country. The other five still have to complete the legal procedures before leaving Chile.
That case highlights a question the reform leaves open: whether more police powers will be enough to carry out more expulsions, or whether judicial, operational and diplomatic obstacles will continue to weigh.
During the debate, comparisons were made with the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), known for its operations to detain and deport migrants.
Adriana Palomera, an academic at the Instituto de Estudios Avanzados (IDEA) of the Universidad de Santiago de Chile (USACH), told El Mostrador that the greatest risk is the violation of people's rights. She questioned the shortened deadline, because those who do not speak Spanish need interpreters, legal assistance and time to gather evidence. "Five days is not enough", she said. She added that the measure could increase pressure on the judicial system.
Isabel Severín, a lawyer and academic at the Law School of Universidad Andrés Bello (UNAB), said that "the speed of the process is not synonymous with efficiency". According to her analysis, an expulsion could be notified to an email address provided by a third party, with no certainty that the affected person receives it.
Severín also objected that filing a recurso de amparo (a habeas corpus petition) could be treated as notification of the expulsion, which starts the clock on the deadline to appeal. In her view, this could discourage legal action. She noted that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights requires guarantees of notification and effective remedies in these procedures.
Both academics agree that the difficulty in carrying out expulsions depends mainly on management: budget, agreements with destination countries and coordination between institutions. In their view, a lack of laws does not explain the problem. "Restricting procedural guarantees does not ensure a greater number of expulsions", Severín said.
Édgar Fuentes-Contreras, a law academic at Universidad de los Andes and an expert in international law, considers the new powers a significant change. Even so, he rules out that Chile is moving toward a model equivalent to ICE, because the reform does not create an autonomous immigration police. The source text does not include the rest of his argument.
The next visible step is carrying out the five pending expulsions of those detained on October 18, which remain subject to legal procedures.
