Victims of institutional violence in Chile’s 2019 social uprising: State policies, gaps and lessons for reparation

Abstract

Introduction: In Chile, the social uprising that occurred from October 2019 to March 2020 was massive and nationwide. It began with vandalism in Santiago’s subway and spread to fires and looting in various cities. Simultaneously, large-scale peaceful demonstrations took place, driven by widely shared social demands. The political repression of these protests caused deaths and serious injuries, including more than 400 victims with some eye damage and an unknown number of victims with shotgun pellet wounds. The protests ended when gatherings were banned due to the pandemic. This article examines the Chilean State’s performance regarding its responsibility to protect harmed citizens from institutional violence following the 2019 social uprising (2019-2025), focusing on the practices and measures of the state’s response, particularly rights recognition, assistance, and victims’ reparation. Methods: This study takes an evaluative, document-based approach. It is supported by official documents issued by the Chilean State and international organisations to analyse the Chilean State’s performance regarding the rights of victims of institutional violence and human rights violations. It examines the government’s pledge to implement policies of recognition and reparation for victims and their families, including a mechanism to monitor reparation measures before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Discussion: Despite the 2022 government agreement with the IACHR, which established a framework for a reparations policy and follow-up for victims in accordance with the highest human rights standards, the promised comprehensive reparations policy was not implemented under Boric’s rule. The findings indicate that the measures and policies depend on how harm to citizens is defined and recorded, thereby shaping the scope of recognition and constraining proposals for comprehensive reparation and rehabilitation policies. Additionally, the response is characterised by a fragmented approach among State institutions and by the arrival of a new President of the Republic, which has led to new policies and different ideological perspectives.

Methods: The analysis draws on institutional documentation and national and international reports. It examines the government’s pledge to implement policies of recognition and reparation for victims and their families, including a mechanism to monitor reparation measures before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).

Discussion: The article analyzes the state measures for victims of the social unrest. Despite the 2022 government agreement with the IACHR, which established a framework for a reparations policy and follow-up for victims in accordance with the highest human rights standards, the promised comprehensive reparations policy was not implemented under Boric’s rule.