Click to expand Image Chilean President José Antonio Kast greets police officers after announcing a new security agenda and stricter immigration enforcement, at the Plaza de Armas in Santiago, Chile, August 6, 2026. © 2026 Esteban Felix/AP Photo (Washington DC) – The Chilean Congress should reject a proposal to amend the Constitution introduced by President José Antonio Kast that would threaten a broad range of human rights, Human Rights Watch said today.The Chilean government submitted a proposal for eight proposed constitutional amendments to the Senate on August 18, 2026, with the stated objective of enhancing the fight against organized crime. Among other things, the proposal would allow the president unfettered authority to declare states of emergency in response to anything deemed to be an imminent threat to “public security.” This would be in addition to the four types of states of emergency already provided for under the Chilean Constitution.“The proposed constitutional amendments threaten the rights of Chileans and endanger their institutions,” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “This is a dangerous power grab that puts the rights of all Chileans at risk.”The new “public security” state of emergency could last up to 240 days without congressional approval and would grant the president the authority to “suspend or restrict personal freedom and mobility and the right to assembly” and “restrict the exercise of the right of association, [and to order the] interception, opening, or search [of] documents and all forms of communication, and order the seizure of property.” The proposal states that a general officer, from either the armed forces or the national police, appointed by the president will be in charge of the zone declared to be experiencing an emergency.The bill would also grant the president new authority to declare groups to be terrorist or criminal organizations but does not specify the legal effects of such a declaration. The bill would also create “differentiated prison regimes,” including limits to visits and prison benefits for certain categories of detainees.International law allows countries to temporarily derogate or suspend some of their human rights obligations but only in very limited circumstances. Under article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, governments may derogate, or partially suspend, some of their obligations under the covenant “in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation.” Such actions should be only those “strictly required by the exigencies of the situation.” Similarly, article 27 of the American Convention on Human Rights allows governments to derogate from some obligations in times of “war, public danger, or other emergency that threatens the independence or security of a State,” provided that such measures are strictly required by the emergency and consistent with other obligations under international law. The proposed amendments, with their broad grant of power to suspend or restrict fundamental human rights, do not align or attempt to align with these human rights frameworks, Human Rights Watch said. “Instead of protecting Chileans, this proposal for a new type of state of emergency and other questionable constitutional changes puts their rights and liberties, such as freedom of assembly and association, at risk,” Goebertus said.