Attacks and harassment against environmental and Indigenous defenders highlight protection failure

Introduction

Municipal and regional elections mark record turnout and highlight fragmented political landscape

Chile’s municipal and regional elections in late October 2024 drew a historic voter turnout of nearly 85 per cent, the highest in the country’s democratic history. With mandatory voting in place, over 13 million Chileans elected local authorities.

The results produced no clear victory: the centre-right coalition Chile Vamos regained key municipalities, including the capital city, while the left secured notable wins such as the re-election of Maipú’s mayor. President Gabriel Boric described the outcome as “bittersweet,” as his coalition avoided the heavy losses some analysts had predicted despite low approval ratings and recent scandals.

The runoff for regional elections was held on 24th November 2025. The Electoral Service of Chile (Servicio Electoral de Chile, Servel) confirmed the final list of elected governors, including victories for Claudio Orrego (centre-left independent) in the Metropolitan Region, and Rodrigo Mundaca (centre-left independent) in Valparaíso, among others.

This outcome reflects a fragmented political landscape ahead of the November 2025 presidential elections.

UN Special Rapporteur called on the Chilean state to align the health system with human rights standards

In December 2024, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Tlaleng Mofokeng, concluded an official country visit to Chile, highlighting concerns regarding systemic inequalities, legal and institutional shortcomings, and insufficient public investment in the health sector.

While acknowledging progress in universal healthcare coverage and policy initiatives such as the ratification of ILO Convention No. 190 and the enactment of the “Ley Karin,” the Special Rapporteur highlighted the absence of constitutional recognition of the right to health, persistent delays in access to care, and structural discrimination affecting Indigenous Peoples, women, persons with disabilities, migrants, LGBTIQA+ people, and persons deprived of liberty.

Particular concern was expressed regarding the limited access to safe and legal abortion. The Rapporteur criticised the broad application of institutional conscientious objection, regional disparities in service provision, and the stigmatisation of women and girls, including cases where survivors of sexual violence under the age of 14 must seek judicial approval. She also documented alarming reports of medical professionals referring women seeking abortions to law enforcement.

Additional areas of concern included deteriorating conditions in the prison health system, the lack of integration of traditional Indigenous medicine, and the ongoing health impact of environmental degradation in areas such as Quintero-Puchuncaví.

The Rapporteur called on Chile to align its legal framework with international human rights obligations, ensure equitable and sustainable health financing, and adopt a multisectoral, inclusive approach to health policy. Emphasis was placed on the need to guarantee non-discriminatory access to care, strengthen mental health services, and incorporate culturally appropriate models of care, particularly for Indigenous communities.

Association

Indigenous leader Julia Chuñir Catricura missing amid concerns over threats and land disputes

On 8th November 2024, Julia Chuñir Catricura, an Indigenous Mapuche leader and president of the Putreguel community in the Los Ríos Region, disappeared after leaving her home to tend to livestock on the Lafrir estate. She was last seen in the Huichaco sector, situated between the communes of Máfil and Los Lagos.

Despite coordinated efforts by her family, community members and local authorities, including police and fire brigades, her whereabouts remain unknown. Search teams found footprints and tyre marks near an abandoned cabin, but no further evidence has surfaced. The family has raised concerns about the limited information shared by the authorities.

As documented by Front Line Defenders, a few days earlier, Chuñir Catricura had faced threats from private actors allegedly attempting to appropriate community land acquired through the National Corporation for Indigenous Development (Corporación Nacional de Desarrollo Indígena, CONADI), which, under Chilean law, cannot be transferred to non-Indigenous persons.

She had firmly rejected these pressures, asserting her community’s collective territorial rights. Her family recalled past incidents of harassment by local landowners in response to her active defence of Mapuche land claims, which reflect a broader pattern of threats and violence against Indigenous human rights defenders in southern Chile.

On 10th December 2024, President Gabriel Boric publicly acknowledged her disappearance, reaffirming the state’s commitment to the search, stating: “There are different searches that have been carried out and we will continue. We will not stop until we find her.” On 8th January 2025, the Regional Representative of the UN Human Rights Office in South America, Jan Jarab, met with Pablo San Martín Chuñir, the defender’s son, alongside members of the Corporation for the Promotion and Defence of People’s Rights (Corporación de Promoción y Defensa de los Derechos del Pueblo, CODEPU) and the Ethical Commission Against Torture (Comisión Ética contra la Tortura).

During the meeting—also attended by UN Women and the Office of the UN Resident Coordinator in Chile—participants shared information on the circumstances of her disappearance and the threats she had previously received. UN agencies expressed concern over the lack of information on her whereabouts and the limited investigative progress. They also urged that the investigation be conducted promptly and effectively, considering all plausible hypotheses and acknowledging Chuñir Catricura’s role as an environmental human rights defender.

Civil society organisations, including Amnesty International and Cultural Survival called on the authorities to increase the search efforts and make public the investigation results carried out

Harassment and arson attacks against environmental defenders

On 13th March 2025, an unidentified individual stalked and photographed five women environmental human rights defenders affiliated with MODATIMA Wallmapu without their consent. The incident occurred after the five women participated in a public event in the municipality of Freire, in Chile’s Araucanía Region, where they raised awareness about environmental harm affecting rural and Indigenous territories. In response, on 1st April 2025, they filed a formal complaint with the Local Prosecutor’s Office in Temuco and demanded accountability.

MODATIMA Wallmapu, part of a national movement that opposes water grabbing and environmental degradation, defends the rights of Mapuche and peasant communities. Members of the organisation have reported repeated incidents of surveillance, threats, and criminalisation in connection with their legitimate human rights and environmental defence work.

Escazú Ahora Foundation, a civil society organisation that monitors the implementation of the Escazú Agreement in Chile, urged the authorities to carry out a prompt, impartial, and effective investigation. The organisation emphasised that this incident forms part of a broader pattern of threats against women human rights defenders in socio-environmental conflict contexts.

In a separate case, on 12th April 2025, unidentified individuals set fire to the vehicle of environmental human rights defender and journalist Matías Rojas outside his residence in Teno, Maule Region. The perpetrators broke the vehicle’s windows and used an accelerant to ignite the fire, in what appears to be a targeted act of intimidation. This incident follows a series of threats and previous assaults, including a physical attack by a local businessman in December 2024, reportedly in retaliation for Rojas’ human rights work.

Rojas has documented and denounced illegal sand extraction and municipal corruption in the region, activities which pose significant environmental risks. The December 2024 assault was initially dismissed by authorities, but the case was reopened after Rojas secured private legal counsel and submitted a formal complaint.

Likewise, on 29th November 2024, a fire destroyed the office of Mapuche lawyer and environmental human rights defender Orietta Llauca Huala in the city of Llanquihue, Los Lagos Region. According to media reports, emergency personnel identified four key elements during their response to the incident: they detected the presence of accelerant substances, confirmed that the fire originated in the area where judicial case files were stored, excluded the possibility of an electrical fault, and indicated the potential involvement of third parties.

This incident took place in the context of sustained threats against Llauca Huala in relation to her work. In 2023, she received a written threat ordering her to abandon her cases and warning that non-compliance would result in the burning of her home. She submitted a formal complaint to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, but the threats reportedly persisted.

Environmental human rights defender convicted of defamation

On 2nd May 2025, a first instance criminal court in Viña del Mar declared environmental human rights defender Gonzalo Pavez Sepúlveda guilty of defamation (daños a la honra) following a complaint by a senior representative of Las Salinas S.A., a real estate firm owned by Copec, part of the influential Angelini Group.

The dispute stems from a video published by the grassroots movement Un Parque para Las Salinas (A Park for Salinas), in which Pavez Sepúlveda and others criticised the company’s environmental record and highlighted its use of hazardous substances in soil remediation on a site historically polluted by petrochemical and agrochemical activity.

The court ordered the removal of the video on grounds that it damaged the reputation of the complainant. However, Pavez Sepúlveda’s legal team argued that the content addressed issues of public interest and focused solely on the complainant’s professional responsibilities—not his private life. On 6th May 2025, an appeal was lodged before the Valparaíso Court of Appeals.

Pavez Sepúlveda, a local resident and member of the Un Parque para Las Salinas movement in Viña del Mar, has been actively advocating for the conversion of the contaminated Las Salinas site into a public park. His work includes denouncing what he and others claim are severe regulatory failures, including the unsupervised use of carcinogenic and neurotoxic substances in remediation processes.

This recent decision is not an isolated incident. On 11th March 2025, Pavez Sepúlveda was also accused of physical assault, based on a video later proven to have been tampered with. The court dismissed the charges after a technical analysis confirmed the manipulation. In both cases, the plaintiffs sought precautionary measures to bar the defender from accessing company sites—measures that would significantly obstruct his advocacy activities.

According to Front Line Defenders, the legal actions against Pavez Sepúlveda form part of a broader pattern of reprisals against members of Un Parque para Las Salinas, who face harassment for their work. The organisation noted increasing concern over the misuse of the justice system in Chile to intimidate and silence environmental human rights defenders, particularly those challenging powerful corporations.

Presidential candidate vilifies and threatens Greenpeace campaign director

On 12th January 2025, José Antonio Kast, presidential candidate of the ultra-conservative Chilean Partido Republicano, threatened and publicly vilified Matías Asún, environmental defender and Campaign Director for Greenpeace in Chile, Argentina and Colombia, during a televised interview. Kast misrepresented Asún’s comments on the proposed reform of the Environmental Impact Assessment System (Sistema de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental, SEIA), implying that environmental oversight causes unjustified delays in investment projects:

“The Greenpeace gentleman dares to attend a Senate session and say that any investment project they want to undertake is subjected to 2,000 days of procedures. We’re going to invite that gentleman to move to another country. We’re going to say: listen, how can you think of causing, just because you feel like it, a delay of 2,000 days, for example, to a desalination plant?”, said Kast.

Kast’s remarks followed a public presentation by Asún before the Chilean Congress. During the session, Asún raised concerns about companies initiating projects without meeting legal environmental requirements.

In response, over 100 civil society organisations and 370 activists condemned Kast’s comments, framing them as part of a wider pattern of discrediting and delegitimising environmental human rights defenders:

“It is unacceptable that public figures with political and social influence promote ideas that threaten the exercise of democracy and human rights, and, in this case, threaten public workers, social leaders and citizens with taking away their jobs or expelling them from the country simply for fulfilling their work and mission. These types of messages evoke regrettable episodes in our history that we must not allow to be repeated: fortunately, the times in which the Chilean State exiled and exonerated people for not sharing the ideas of its leaders are in the past.”

Report reveals alarming surge in attacks against environmental human rights defenders

According to the 2024 report by the Escazú Ahora Foundation, the situation of environmental human rights defenders in Chile continues to deteriorate, with a marked increase in both the scale and complexity of threats and attacks; a troubling situation that exposes severe gaps in state protection frameworks and the growing risks for those who defend the environment and land rights.

The report documents a surge in violent attacks, with nearly half of all recorded incidents involving physical aggression—more than three times the proportion registered in 2023. The Biobío, Los Lagos and Los Ríos regions accounted for the highest number of violent cases. The Valparaíso region reported the highest number of total cases, but Biobío stood out as the most violent.

Women defenders bore the brunt. Despite a roughly equal number of men and women affected, 70.2 per cent of all 47 reported cases targeted women. This pattern underscores the gendered nature of environmental conflict in Chile, where women often face repeated and specific forms of physical and verbal attacks.

The report also highlighted a shift in the methods of judicial harassment. In contrast to 2023—when civil lawsuits dominated—2024 saw a marked rise in the use of criminal charges and other legal mechanisms to stifle environmental advocacy, particularly in disputes involving energy infrastructure and sanitation projects. Forest-related conflicts emerged as a major flashpoint, accounting for 38.3 per cent of all threats and 91.3 per cent of physical assaults, concentrated in Biobío and Los Lagos.

Access to justice remains elusive for most victims. Authorities failed to pursue legal action in 38.2 per cent of cases, often due to widespread mistrust in the justice system or fear of re-victimisation. Among the cases that advanced, over half (53.1 per cent) remained unresolved by the end of 2024, while just 2.1 per cent reached outcomes favourable to defenders.

The data gathered reflect a significant escalation in physical violence, gendered impacts, legal harassment, and impunity, raising serious concerns under international human rights standards.

Human rights defenders still unprotected, INDH warns in 2024 annual report

On 10th December 2024, the National Human Rights Institute (Instituto Nacional de Derechos Humanos, INDH) in its 2024 Annual Report highlighted persistent weaknesses in the protection of human rights. Particularly, the report paints a troubling picture of institutional inertia in the face of growing risks faced by human rights defenders.

The report criticised the Chilean state for failing to establish a legal framework that explicitly recognises and protects human rights defenders. Although a Protocol for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders has been formulated, the INDH noted that its implementation remains pending. Moreover, the protocol’s current scope is narrow—limited to criminal justice processes—leaving civil threats, including the use of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), unaddressed.

According to the INDH, there are no urgent protective measures or national registries to assess the scale of threats or attacks against HRDs. Investigations into violations fail to consider the human rights defender’s role as a risk factor, nor do they assess patterns or potential retaliation motives. The Public Prosecutor’s Office lacks binding institutional guidelines to address these concerns, and existing support units do not provide differentiated protection measures tailored to HRDs.

In its recommendations, the INDH reiterated the need—first raised in 2016—for all branches of the state to formally recognise and implement protections for human rights defenders, especially against threats from both state agents and non-state actors. It called on lawmakers to adopt specific legislation and urged reforms to prevent the misuse of criminal defamation laws. It further recommended that justice institutions, law enforcement agencies and public officials receive permanent training on the role and rights of HRDs.

Landmark bill to protect environmental human rights defenders

On 9th April 2025, the Environment and Natural Resources Committee of the Chamber of Deputies of Chile approved the bill on the protection of nature and environmental human rights defenders (No. 16.886-12). Its advancement comes amid mounting calls from civil society for robust legal safeguards and reflects Chile’s obligations under international and regional frameworks, including the Escazú Agreement, ratified in 2022.

The proposed legislation enshrines a range of state duties, including the establishment of inter-agency coordination bodies, early warning systems, and procedural guarantees to ensure safe, informed public participation in environmental matters. It further guarantees legal assistance and protective measures for those facing threats, with particular emphasis on people and communities in situations of vulnerability.

The bill also introduces criminal liability for corporations implicated in offences against environmental human rights defenders. It also amends the Economic Crimes Law to include aggravating circumstances where environmental defenders are targeted.

Civil society organisations have welcomed the measure as a long-overdue response to escalating attacks on defenders, particularly in regions impacted by extractive industries, forestry disputes and environmental degradation.

Peaceful Assembly

Artisanal fishers protest Fishing Quota Distribution bill amid heightened tensions

On 25th and 26th March 2025, thousands of artisanal fishers mobilised across Chile, including outside the National Congress in Valparaíso and in key port cities, to protest the proposed Fishing Quota Distribution bill (“Ley de Fraccionamiento”). The bill, considered a core component of the broader fisheries legislation reform, seeks to regulate the exploitation of maritime resources through the redistribution of quotas across 18 fisheries.

Protesters demanded the reinstatement of the original version of the bill approved by the lower chamber, expressing concern that recent amendments adopted by the Senate would disproportionately benefit the industrial fishing sector. Pedro Toño, President of the Caleta Portales workers’ association, criticised the changes: “The Chamber of Deputies approved a 70 per cent share of common hake for artisanal fishing and 30 per cent for industrial operations. In the Senate, this was reversed to 43 per cent for artisanal and 57 per cent for industrial. We cannot accept this outcome. We have endured significant hardship, and we hope to safeguard the gains secured in the lower house.”

On 25th March, the protests escalated near the National Congress, particularly at Plaza O’Higgins in Valparaíso, where protesters breached a perimeter fence. According to media reports, one Carabinero sustained a leg injury during the incident. Protesters reportedly also threw objects at the office windows of Senate President José García Ruminot (National Renewal). Additional objects struck a room where the Environment Committee was meeting to debate legislation on coastal management and maritime concessions, disrupting the session. In response, the Carabineros detained four protesters.

On 26th March, law enforcement used tear gas and water cannon to disperse the protest in the Caleta Portales port, Valparaiso. The demonstrations later intensified across other regions. Protesters reportedly set fire to three police vehicles on Route 5 South, near the municipality of San Javier, approximately 270 kilometres south of Santiago. The following day, mobilisation efforts extended to the coastline, where protesters obstructed the entry of cargo vessels attempting to access the ports of Valparaíso and San Antonio.

Artisanal fishers alleged that the revised quota allocations would reduce their access to key species such as common hake, warning that it may also result in the reintroduction of bottom trawling practices. According to the annual reports of the Undersecretariat of Fisheries, common hake has fluctuated for years between overexploitation and depletion.

César Astete, Director of Fisheries Campaigns at Oceana, explained to Mongabay Latam that “the critical situation results from historic overfishing, including illegal activity, and the industrial practice of bottom trawling, which contributes to the crisis not only from an environmental perspective, but also socially and economically, particularly for artisanal fishing communities.”

Use of force bill raises alarms

On 12th May 2025, the Chamber of Deputies rejected ten amendments to the bill establishing general rules on the use of force by law enforcement, prison officials and military personnel in designated public security contexts (“Proyecto de Ley: Establece normas generales sobre el uso de la fuerza para el personal de las fuerzas de orden y seguridad pública y de las fuerzas armadas en las circunstancias que se señala”, No. 15805-07). A joint committee of five deputies and five senators must now negotiate the final text before it can advance through the legislative process.

The decision follows a criticised 23rd April Senate vote that excluded the principle of proportionality from the bill—a core principle of international human rights law. This omission, legal experts warned, could legitimise arbitrary and excessive use of force by state agents, undermining Chile’s binding commitments under international treaties.

Originally introduced by the government in April 2023, the draft legislation is now in its third constitutional stage. While the bill represents an attempt to codify the use of force in a single legislative instrument, standardise operational criteria, and enhance legal certainty for security forces, concerns remain regarding its compatibility with international human rights standards.

On 24th January 2025, four UN Special Experts welcomed Chile’s intention to regulate the use of force through legislation, recognising it as a step forward in aligning national practices with international standards. Nonetheless, the experts urged the government to strengthen the bill to ensure full compliance with instruments such as the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, and the Guidance on Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement.

The UN experts identified several areas of concern:

• Imprecise terminology: Terms such as “legitimate objective” in Article 2 remain too vague, potentially allowing discretionary and unregulated use of force. The experts reiterated that force must be strictly necessary, used as a last resort, and limited to what is proportionate and unavoidable.
• Oversight and accountability: The absence of independent monitoring bodies violates international standards. As noted in Human Rights Committee General Comment No. 37, robust and impartial oversight is essential to prevent impunity.
• Military involvement in internal security: The bill fails to specify that when the Armed Forces engage in public security tasks, they are equally bound by human rights obligations applicable to civilian police.

Amnesty International Chile has also expressed serious concerns that the bill could institutionalise excessive use of force by effectively providing legal cover for rights violations. In a 22nd April statement, the organisation warned that the legislation could entrench impunity by providing a legal veneer for rights violations. Among its concerns:

• First, it noted conceptual ambiguity in the use of terms such as “unlawful aggression”, “active resistance”, and “imminent danger”, which remain undefined or overly vague, thereby enabling broad discretion in the interpretation and application of force.
• Second, the bill introduces a presumption of lawfulness, establishing that the use of force is presumed lawful when exercised in the line of duty—an approach that may undermine the duty to investigate all uses of force.
• Third, Amnesty highlighted the inadequate regulation of less-lethal weapons, pointing to the absence of clear protocols for devices such as tasers, as well as the lack of transparency and accountability, particularly concerning the history of Carabineros using reserved protocols for crowd control.
• Fourth, the bill fails to create independent oversight mechanisms, omitting the establishment of external supervisory bodies empowered to monitor and review the use of force.
• Fifth, the legislation permits military involvement in internal security operations without adequate civilian oversight.
• Lastly, the bill does not include specific safeguards for at-risk groups such as children, persons with disabilities, or people with psychosocial conditions, nor does it require the systematic documentation of law enforcement activities involving the use of force.

If adopted in its current form, however, the bill may fall short of the state’s international obligations and risk undermining the freedom of peaceful assembly.

Acquittal of Carabineros officer in police shooting case raises concerns over use of force standards

On 9th May 2025, the Sixth Criminal Trial Court of Santiago unanimously acquitted Gonzalo Andrés de la Costa Lara, an officer of the Carabineros, of all charges arising from two separate police operations in the municipality of San Joaquín, during the height of Chile’s 2019–2020 social unrest. The ruling dismissed allegations of unjustified gunfire and serious bodily injury, including charges brought by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and additional claims filed by the National Human Rights Institute and the human rights organisation CODEPU for repeated acts of ill-treatment and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

The alleged incidents occurred on 19th October 2019 and 2nd March 2020, during state operations that left one man with permanent foot injuries and a 12-year-old girl with lasting trauma from a gunshot wound to the hip. According to the victims' representatives, both individuals were civilians and unarmed at the time of the incidents.

The Court found the evidence insufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt the material elements of the alleged offences. It determined that the officer’s conduct complied with the regulatory framework in force at the time and applied the legal justification of self-defence under Article 10(6) of the Penal Code.

Following the judgment, CODEPU observed that the Court’s ruling confirmed the acquittal of a police officer in a case involving two people—one who sustained permanent foot injuries and a 12-year-old girl who suffered lasting injuries after being struck by live ammunition. The organisation expressed concern that the judgment reflects a broader institutional failure to apply international standards on the use of force and accountability for law enforcement officials.

It further questioned the compatibility of Law No. 21.560 (also referred to as the Naín-Retamal Law) with international human rights obligations, as the law significantly broadens the scope of self-defence and may contribute to a weakening of safeguards against excessive use of force. According to CODEPU, the Court’s reasoning—in particular its reliance on a generalised context of disorder to justify the conduct—risks undermining judicial oversight and may deter victims and civil society actors from pursuing legal redress in similar cases.

The 2025 Amnesty International Annual Report echoed these concerns, documenting a persistent pattern of impunity for human rights violations and crimes under international law perpetrated during and after the 2019 protests. The report also noted that several political figures have openly questioned the independence and legitimacy of prosecutorial efforts, particularly those targeting members of the Carabineros’ former high command.

A first instance criminal court acknowledged torture in protest, but acquittal underscores obstacles to justice

On 10th February 2025, the Criminal Trial Court of Talagante issued a judgment in the case of Héctor Pérez Catalán, who documented a protest in the capital city on 19th October 2019 during the social unrest. While recording police operations using his mobile phone, officers from the Investigative Police of Chile (Policía de Investigaciones, PDI) physically assaulted him. Authorities subsequently charged Sub-Commissioner Manuel Ortiz Otárola with torture under Article 150(a) of the Penal Code.

The Court concluded that the acts committed against Pérez constituted torture and classified the offence as consummated. However, the Court acquitted Ortiz due to insufficient evidence directly linking him to the assaults. The Court found no conclusive proof—neither direct nor circumstantial—demonstrating the accused’s personal involvement in the unlawful conduct described in the indictment. Peréz’s legal team announced their intention to appeal the acquittal.

Despite the outcome, the Court’s recognition of torture as the applicable offence represents a significant development in the judicial response to allegations of police violence during the social unrest. According to Catalina Padilla, a lawyer with CODEPU, who represented the victim, this marks only the sixth case since 2019 in which Chilean courts have applied the legal classification of torture rather than the lesser offence of “unlawful coercion” (apremios ilegítimos), which is frequently used in similar circumstances.

Civil society mobilises in defence of missing Mapuche leader Julia Chuñil

In a growing wave of mobilisation across Chile, civil society organisations have called attention to the disappearance of Mapuche leader Julia Chuñil (see association), demanding urgent state action and accountability. On 27th December 2024, the Sebastián Acevedo Movement Against Torture (Movimiento Contra la Tortura Sebastián Acevedo, MCTSA) led a demonstration outside La Moneda Palace, denouncing state inaction and calling for the protection of environmental and Indigenous defenders in accordance with Chile’s international obligations.

Carrying banners that read “Where is Julia Chuñil?” and “The state is responsible,” protesters called on the government and the Public Prosecutor’s Office to disclose the scope of their search efforts. Protesters underscored that Chile is a signatory to the Escazú Agreement—a binding regional treaty that obliges states to guarantee the protection of environmental human rights defenders. They urged the authorities to fulfil this commitment, initiate an independent investigation, and ensure the safe and immediate appearance of Chuñil. Protesters also demanded that those responsible for her disappearance be brought to justice.

On 8th January 2025, activists in Santiago and Valparaíso joined coordinated protests held in multiple regions, reiterating demands for Julia Chuñil's safe return and condemning what they perceive as a systemic failure to protect Indigenous land defenders. On 8th May 2025, six months after the disappearance of Chuñil, social movements, Indigenous communities and human rights organisations also mobilised across the country, marking another day of protest to demand concrete action and accountability from the Chilean state. Protesters denounced institutional inaction and called for full compliance with Chile’s obligations under the Escazú Agreement.

Indigenous resistance in the Atacama Desert

On 10th January 2025, Atacameño communities from Toconao, Cámar, Socaire and Talabre blocked the main access road to the Salar de Atacama, where mining company SQM and Albermarle operate lithium extraction projects. The protest was led by the Council of Atacameño Peoples (Consejo de Pueblos Atacameños, CPA), in response to the announcement of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between Codelco and SQM. The agreement, which extends lithium exploitation in the territory until 2060, was denounced by the CPA for having been drafted without the free, prior and informed consent of the affected Indigenous communities.

Community members view the exclusion from this process as a violation of their rights under both Chilean law and international standards, including ILO Convention 169 and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The blockade, initially declared as indefinite, was intended to compel President Gabriel Boric to fulfil his public commitment to visit the Salar and engage directly with the communities.

After nearly three days of sustained mobilisation and negotiations with officials from the Ministry of Mines, the CPA announced on the night of 12th January 2025 that it would temporarily lift the blockade following a government pledge to grant the Atacameño communities an audience with President Boric.

The lithium-rich Salar de Atacama remains a focal point of conflict between economic interests and Indigenous territorial rights.

Massive mobilisations mark International Women’s Day

On 8th March 2025, thousands of women and girls took to the streets across Chile to commemorate International Women's Day. The main march in Santiago, organised by the Coordinadora Feminista 8M, commenced at Plaza Baquedano and proceeded along the Alameda to Plaza Los Héroes, featuring cultural performances and speeches.

According to Carabineros de Chile, approximately 15,000 people participated in the Santiago march. However, organisers estimated a significantly higher turnout, reflecting the widespread support for the feminist movement in the country. The demonstration proceeded peacefully during the day, with participants carrying banners, chanting slogans, and engaging in artistic expressions to highlight women's rights issues.

In the afternoon, isolated incidents occurred near the end of the march. Reports indicated that small groups erected burning barricades and clashed with police forces in the vicinity of San Ignacio Street. Carabineros responded with water cannon and other crowd-control measures. Authorities reported 16 detentions related to public disorder and preventive actions, and one woman sustained injuries from a thrown object.

Civil servants mobilise to defend job security

On 28th November 2024, the National Association of Public Employees (Asociación Nacional de Empleados Fiscales, ANEF), in alliance with the Central Unitary Workers' Union (Central Unitaria de Trabajadores, CUT) and other public sector unions, launched a nationwide strike to protest recent changes introduced by the Office of the Comptroller General. At the centre of the dispute is a revised interpretation of the principle of “legitimate confidence”, which has historically provided state workers with protection against arbitrary dismissal after a certain period of service.

Under the new criteria, workers who have not reached a defined threshold of tenure may be dismissed without it being considered illegal or arbitrary—a shift that union leaders argue undermines hard-won guarantees of job stability. ANEF has rejected the change, framing the issue as a fundamental breach of public service ethics and institutional integrity.

Expression

Arbitrary detention of two journalists

On 30th January 2025, officers from the 50th Police Station of San Joaquín arbitrarily detained Gian Giachetti of Televisión Nacional de Chile (TVN) and journalist Fernando Fabres of Mega, as they were covering the aftermath of a homicide. According to the Chilean Association of Journalists, tensions escalated late in the evening when Carabineros officers abruptly extended the security perimeter around the crime scene.

This move prompted a confrontation between police personnel and journalists on site, during which Giachetti and Fabres were detained under the pretext of a routine identity check. Both journalists were reportedly complying with professional protocols and were clearly identified as media personnel at the time of their apprehension.

The Sindicato de Prensa N° 3 of TVN swiftly condemned the incident, labelling it a violent and unjustified act that infringed upon the right to report freely. The union affirmed that Carabineros acted with full awareness that Giachetti was on duty as a journalist, yet proceeded to handcuff him and transport him to a police station. Allegations of physical mistreatment during his detention have further deepened concerns, with the union denouncing the use of force as unnecessary and coercive.

Attacks against the press in 2024

Chile saw a rise in recorded attacks against journalists in 2024, according to the latest annual report by the Observatorio del Derecho a la Comunicación (ODC), a civil society organisation dedicated to the defence of press freedom. The report, based on systematic monitoring, documents 132 violations against the press, marking a 27 per cent increase from 2023 and highlighting an increasingly hostile environment for media workers—especially women.

The ODC report identifies 94 cases and 38 instances of obstruction of access to public information through transparency mechanisms. A total of 128 people were documented as victims of violence or restrictions, with 113 perpetrators identified—most of them connected to public authorities or state agents.

One of the report’s most concerning findings is the diversification of the contexts in which press aggression occurs. Unlike in previous years, violations were no longer confined to coverage of public protests. Journalists have been targeted across a broader range of reporting environments, indicating a normalisation of hostility toward the press.

Particularly at risk are television crews working in the field, who remain the most exposed profile to physical and verbal aggression. The growing number of judicial proceedings against independent and local digital media outlets also reveals a rising trend in legal harassment, used as a tool to silence critical journalism.

The ODC report also signals an alarming increase in gender-based violence targeting women journalists, especially in digital spaces. For the first time, women became the majority of victims in a specific category of public vilification. Women journalists with a strong presence on social media platforms have been subjected to massive, repeated, and highly targeted attacks related to their gender identity or sexual orientation.

Removal of journalist’s post by Meta

On 19th January 2025, journalist Daniel Matamala faced the removal of content from Instagram, a platform owned by Meta, following the publication of an opinion column in La Tercera and a related post on his social media account. In his article, Matamala critically examined the role of digital platforms in disseminating disinformation, facilitating hate speech and shaping public opinion. He expressed concern over the influence of technology corporations on political discourse and governance, stating that “those who control these platforms will now sit in the seats of honour, alongside the authorities of the new government,” referring to the President of the United States. Shortly after publication, both the Instagram post and associated content were taken down. No public explanation was issued by Meta regarding the removal.

The Chilean Association of Journalists issued a statement condemning the action, characterising it as an act of censorship. The Association declared solidarity with Matamala and criticised the disproportionate power exercised by digital technology companies over online content. The statement warned that the incident represents not only an infringement of the individual journalist’s rights but also a broader threat to freedom of expression and media pluralism in Chile and beyond.

Supreme Court rejects lawyer's attempt to censor publication of leaked private messages

In a decision reaffirming the primacy of press freedom and the public interest, Chile’s Supreme Court on 30th December 2024 upheld the Santiago Court of Appeals’ rejection of a constitutional protection claim filed by prominent lawyer Samuel Donoso. The claim sought to prevent the publication and dissemination of private WhatsApp messages between Donoso and fellow lawyers Luis Hermosilla and Gabriel Zaliasnik—conversations that reportedly included coordination of legal strategies and attempts to influence the appointment of the National Prosecutor.

The dispute began on 14th November 2024, when Donoso filed a constitutional remedy before the Santiago Court of Appeals. He argued that his constitutional rights had been violated following inquiries made by the investigative outlet The Clinic, which on 9th November 2024 had requested comment regarding a series of messages obtained from Hermosilla’s phone. The outlet intended to publish the content in an upcoming exposé.

Donoso requested that the court block publication, compel The Clinic to hand over the messages, and order their destruction. Despite this, the Clinic proceeded with its publication on 17th November 2024, revealing exchanges in which the three lawyers allegedly discussed leaking sensitive case information to the press, discrediting public officials, and lobbying for the nomination of José Morales as National Prosecutor.

In response, Donoso petitioned the court to remove the article and prohibit any future citation of his messages. The Santiago Court of Appeals dismissed the claim as inadmissible, ruling that it did not satisfy the legal criteria required for constitutional protection. The Court noted that alternative legal remedies were available, including the right of rectification under Article 16 of Law No. 19.733 or criminal proceedings.

Donoso appealed the decision and submitted additional motions to the Supreme Court, including evidence of a subsequent article published on 9th December 2024 involving new leaked conversations—this time between Luis Hermosilla and former Interior Minister Andrés Chadwick, whom Donoso represents in a strand of the so-called “Hermosilla Case.”

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court’s Third Chamber unanimously upheld the earlier ruling. The Court once again found the claim inadmissible, affirming that the publication of messages, regardless of their private nature, did not constitute a rights violation. However, it did forward the case’s background documentation to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for review.

Judicial ruling on the dismissal of journalist Paulina de Allende-Salazar

On 2nd January 2025, the First Labour Court of Santiago issued a first-instance judgment in favour of journalist Paulina de Allende-Salazar, who was dismissed by Megamedia S.A. on 6th April 2023 after mistakenly referring to a deceased police officer as “paco” during a live broadcast. The court found that the dismissal violated the journalist’s constitutional rights, including her right to honour and freedom of expression. The ruling ordered Megamedia to issue a public apology and awarded financial compensation for contractual and moral damages.

The judgment concluded that the dismissal breached fundamental labour rights and constituted an unjustified termination. The court ordered Megamedia to pay CLP 243 million (around USD 260,000) pursuant to a contractual clause applicable in cases of early termination, as well as an additional CLP 20 million (around USD 20,000) for non-pecuniary damage due to the reputational harm caused to the journalist.

Furthermore, the broadcaster must issue a public apology on its morning programme Mucho Gusto and across the same platforms used to disseminate the original statements, within a period not exceeding three months from the conclusion of the proceedings. As part of the reparation measures, the court also mandated in-person training for Megamedia’s journalists and managerial staff. The training must focus on freedom of expression issues.

According to media reports, Paulina de Allende-Salazar welcomed the ruling, noting that it sets an important precedent for the protection of journalists’ rights in Chile. She highlighted the court’s recognition of the right to be heard prior to public disciplinary measures and viewed the ruling as a step forward in reaffirming institutional guarantees for freedom of expression in the workplace. The decision may be appealed by Megamedia.

Supreme Court orders Meta to respond to content removal case

On 4th February 2025, Chile’s Supreme Court overturned a prior ruling by the Santiago Court of Appeals, mandating that Meta Platforms Inc.—the parent company of Facebook and Instagram—must respond to a constitutional protection claim (recurso de protección) concerning the removal of content related to Palestine from Instagram.

The case originated from a journalist’s complaint that Meta had deleted posts discussing the situation in Palestine, actions perceived as digital censorship. In November 2024, a Chilean journalist reposted content from the Instagram account “eye.on.palestine”, which featured images and videos of demonstrations calling for a ceasefire in Lebanon. Without prior notice, Instagram removed the post, alleging it violated the platform’s community standards.

The initial dismissal by the Court of Appeals was based on jurisdictional grounds, asserting that Meta’s content moderation policies were governed by its terms of service and not subject to Chilean judicial oversight.

However, the Supreme Court’s reversal underscores a significant shift, asserting that digital platforms operating within Chile are subject to national laws and judicial scrutiny, especially when fundamental rights such as freedom of expression are at stake.

According to legal experts, “the arbitrary removal of content is not a minor matter and must be subject to judicial scrutiny. The discussion is not limited to the removal of a specific publication, but to the need for the courts to act as a counterweight to the power that companies like Meta have to decide what users can or cannot share.”