| Basic information | Substance of the ruling | Accessibility of the case and further relevant links | |||||||
| Date | Name of the case (or case number) | The body delivering the decision | Keywords, topic | Executive part | Brief summary | Full text | Page at the website of the issuing court | Page in other databases | Unofficial materials, press communications |
| January 3. 2023. | Decision Rol. 268-2022. | Constitutional Court of Chile | Right to information; right to conduct a business | The Constitutional Court of Chile held that upon request, the components of the Covid-19 vaccinations, their usual uses and the changes in the composition on the vaccines should be revealed. | A Chilean woman requested from the company responsible for the development of Covid-19 vaccinations in Chile to reveal the main components of Covid-19 vaccinations, their usual uses and the changes in the main composition of these vaccines. The company rejected to fulfil the request, while the claim was partially upheld by the lower courts. The Constitutional Court accepted the argumentation of the claimant and held that the requested information shall be public regardless of the business interest of the developing company, therefore, the requested information should be provided. | https://www.diarioconstitucional.cl/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/5.-Rol-N%C2%B0-268-2022-ICA-Stgo-CPLT.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/news/2023/02/chile-constitutional-court-orders-pharmaceutical-company-disclose-information | ||
| 12. 01. 2022 | Rol. 11.647-2021 | Constitutional Tribunal of Chile | Right to access to justice, Virtual hearings | Claim upheld | The person prosecuted before the Criminal Court has appealed to the Constitutional Court to declare that the expression in a law unconstitutional. This Law provided that, during the pandemic, criminal procedures against the inmate population may only be suspended upon the “absolute impossibility” of one of the parties to exercise its rights. According to the plaintiff, the expression “absolute impossibility” was contrary to the Constitution, since it obliged the inmate population to act in the context of criminal procedures by virtual means, jeopardizing its right to due process and depriving them from the advantages of a proper trial. The Court clarified that the expression was indeed a degradation of the right to due process, given that it was validating violations to due process that were not tantamount to an absolute impossibility. The Court ruled that the rule was unconstitutional and declared it inapplicable to the case. However, it maintained that this does not mean that conducting criminal proceedings by virtual means is contrary to due process, as the Applicant claimed. | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/chile-constitutional-tribunal-rol-11647-2021-2022-01-12 | |||
| 10. 12. 2020 | Rol No. 8.892-2020 | Constitutional Court of Chile | Right to access to justice, Equality, Virtual hearings | Claim upheld | The appellant (defendant) considered that his right to a fair trial would be violated if the hearings were held via video conference, given that the quality of the information provided at the evidentiary stage was not comparable to the way evidence is produced and perceived by judges in a face-to-face hearing. In addition, he considered that his rights of defence would be violated as he would not be in the same physical space as his lawyer, which would impede their communication and the confidentiality of their communications. The defendant also believed that his right to equality would be violated because he would not have the same opportunity to defend his rights and position as other defendants whose trials were in person rather than online. The Constitutional Court ruled that virtual trials could be held, but decided that they could violate the accused's right to self-defence, as certain principles of due process - immediacy and contradiction - would not be met. | https://vlex.cl/vid/852812169 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/chile-constitutional-court-rol-no-8892-2020-2020-12-10 | ||
| 16. 04. 2020 | Rol. 8574-2020 | Constitutional Tribunal of Chile | Equality, Non-discrimination | Claim rejected | In the wake of the crisis triggered by COVID-19, the Chilean Congress has passed a law providing for the commutation of sentences for convicts over 75 years of age. Some members of Congress have filed lawsuits against this law, claiming that it violates the Constitution. According to the Plaintiffs, the statutory exclusion for the crime committed violates the principle of equality before the law. The plaintiffs argued that since the purpose of the law was to provide relief to convicts over the age of 75 because of the potential risk of death if they contracted the COVID-19 virus, there was no valid reason to exclude convicts over the age of 75 solely because of the crime for which they were convicted. The Court declared that the rule is in line with the Constitution. The Court stated that it recognized the existence of substantial differences between the crimes of those who were excluded from the benefits of conversion and those who were included. | https://www.pucv.cl/uuaa/site/docs/20200504/20200504135024/stc_rol_n___8574_2020.pdf |
https://verfassungsblog.de/the-downfall-of-a-constitutional-court/ https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/chile-constitutional-tribunal-rol-8574-2020-2020-04-16 |
||
