A/HRC/32/36/Add.1 76. The Special Rapporteur finds it worrying that a bill enabling wider use of preventive identity controls is pending in Parliament and had been endorsed by the Chamber of Deputies at the time of his visit.22 Article 12 of bill No. 9985-07 introduces a new general power for the police to stop and check the identity of anybody, without any indication or context of a crime. This provision greatly exacerbates the risk of chilling the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and other rights and possibly violating such rights, as no justification whatsoever will be needed to stop people and request identification. 77. The Special Rapporteur fears that the bill will disproportionately affect groups at risk, such as youth (students), indigenous peoples, trade unionists and migrants. Giving law enforcement authorities enhanced power and discretion could create opportunities for repression and abuse of authority, with little or no checks and balances. He is also worried that there is not sufficient independent oversight of the data collected during the preventive identity controls. Overall, the Special Rapporteur echoes the statement made by the Supreme Court in its report of September 2015 that the preventive identity checks, as envisaged in the bill on combating crime, is “difficult to accept in a democratic State”.23 78. During his visit, the Special Rapporteur was told by Government officials that the bill is necessary to stem a recent increase in criminal activity in Chile. He is, however, not convinced that the law will be effective in combating crime. In fact, it may do the opposite; allowing the police to randomly detain anyone they choose without any evidence or identifiable suspicion is a shortcut that fosters counterproductive policing. Effective police forces can do their jobs without interfering with fundamental rights. The Special Rapporteur is confident that Chile’s police force is effective and that it does not need — nor will it benefit from — such shortcuts. 79. On 17 November 2015, the Special Rapporteur issued a comprehensive analysis of the bill, which was shared with key members of the Chilean executive, legislative and judiciary.24 He urges all stakeholders involved in the legislative process to take into account the concerns detailed in that document with a view to ensuring that Chile complies with its obligations under international human rights law and to further strengthening democracy and the rule of law in the country. 4. Military jurisdiction 80. Also of great concern to the Special Rapporteur is the fact that human rights violations committed by law enforcement authorities can fall under the jurisdiction of military justice. This is highly problematic. First of all, military jurisdictions ought to be limited to matters of a military nature only; second, military courts do not offer sufficient guarantees of independence and impartiality in such cases. According to INDH, between 1990 and 2011, 40,000 cases of police abuses were reported, but perpetrators were 22 23 24 Since the Special Rapporteur’s visit, bill No. 9985-07 has been examined by the Senate Commission for Constitution, Legislation and Justice and a few modifications have been made, which, however, did not alter the purpose of the bill. See Radio U Chile, “Informe de Corte Suprema califica de ‘ineficaz’ proyecto de ley antidelincuencia”, 22 September 2015, available at http://radio.uchile.cl/2015/09/22/informe-de-cortesuprema-califica-de-ineficaz-proyecto-de-ley-antidelincuencia. See Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Information note, “Analysis of the proposed regime of identity control, draft bill number 9985-07 of Chile” by the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, Maina Kiai, 18 November 2015. Available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/FAssociation/2015-1118_Information_note_Chile_ENG.pdf. 15