Chile's Chamber of Deputies approved a constitutional accusation against Judge Antonio Ulloa of the Santiago Court of Appeals with a wide majority, over alleged contacts with Luis Hermosilla. The vote, with 141 in favor, one against and two abstentions, sends the case to the Senate next week. Lawmakers highlighted the move as a step toward transparency in the judiciary.
On October 29, 2025, Chile's Chamber of Deputies approved the admissibility of the constitutional accusation against Judge Antonio Ulloa, after dismissing his defense's appeal. The vote tallied 141 in favor, one against from Deputy María Luisa Cordero, and abstentions from José Miguel Castro and Sergio Bobadilla. This action, driven by questions over Ulloa's contacts with lawyer Luis Hermosilla, now heads to the Senate, where it will be reviewed next week by a commission comprising Deputies Carolina Tello, Eric Aedo, and Daniel Manouchehri.
Lawmakers from various parties reacted positively, stressing the need for judicial integrity. Alejandra Placencia (PC), head of the reviewing commission, stated: “For us, it is very clear that what we voted on today, by an overwhelming majority, is to vote in favor of transparency, in favor of probity, and of the guarantees that our country must provide to all citizens.” Daniel Manouchehri (PS), a signatory of the accusation, added: “We cannot allow our justice system to be co-opted by dark networks.”
Daniella Cicardini (PS) emphasized: “I believe a dishonest judge does more harm to our society than 100 criminals on the loose.” Camila Musante (PPD) noted that the approval dismantles “the network of favors that Hermosilla installed in the judiciary.” Andrés Giordano (FA) asserted that “impartiality and probity are not optional; they are a duty.” From the opposition, Camila Flores (RN) criticized the Supreme Court for not acting earlier: “The Chamber of Deputies simply corrected an error and finally removed Minister Ulloa.”
Upon leaving Congress, Judge Ulloa responded: “I submit to the institutional process. The important thing is the outcome, and we must go to the Senate.” The measure fits into broader efforts to cleanse the judiciary of undue influences, according to the lawmakers.