Socialist Senator Fidel Espinoza expressed willingness to back the constitutional security reform presented by Senators Pedro Araya, Andrés Longton and Arturo Squella, according to BioBioChile. His position clashes with that of the Socialist Party's (PS) Central Committee, which rejected the initiative and warned of consequences for lawmakers who negotiate outside their parties.
The reform seeks to give the state more tools against organized crime. It comes after the government withdrew its own constitutional bill in the Senate.
The Central Committee objected mainly to two points. One is that it broadens the grounds for declaring states of emergency. The other is that it allows rights to be restricted in response to threats that have yet to materialize. In the party's view, the proposal gives the executive branch "an excessive margin of discretion" to limit freedoms and weakens democratic oversight.
The party also maintained that withdrawing the government's original text does not resolve the underlying concerns. In its view, fighting crime does not justify concentrating more power in the presidency.
Espinoza distinguishes between the two initiatives. He acknowledged to BioBioChile that the executive branch's bill was "tremendously bad" and curtailed freedoms. He particularly criticized its provision allowing the president to declare states of exception for up to 240 days without going through Congress, something he said he would never support.
His assessment of the three senators' proposal, however, is different. The lawmaker made his vote conditional on being convinced that the text directly targets organized crime.
The PS statement included a message, without naming anyone, for opposition lawmakers who strike deals without their caucuses' backing. "Those who negotiate on the side, behind the backs of their caucuses, their parties and collective agreements, give the right what it did not win at the ballot box," the document stated. It added that such conduct "is a break with the party and has consequences".
Espinoza responded with a call for restraint. He asked parties to avoid "intemperate" statements and let lawmakers vote according to what voters are asking for. "People on the street ask me for more security," he said.
The PS says it does want a security agenda, but through institutional channels. It proposes more intelligence, better-equipped police, greater territorial control and pursuing organized crime's money by removing banking secrecy barriers. It also called for broad agreements combining funding, prevention, reintegration and the reclamation of public spaces.
The dispute reopens a longstanding debate on the center-left: how much autonomy a lawmaker has in relation to their party's position. It comes just as the government seeks votes for its security agenda. The BioBioChile report does not say whether the PS will impose any specific sanction or when the Senate will vote on the reform.
