The Constitutional Court of Chile (, abbreviated TC) is Chile's constitutional tribunal. It is an autonomous body that is not part of the judicial branch and is functionally independent of the National Congress, the President of the Republic, and the ordinary courts. Its principal task is to review the constitutionality of laws, decrees, and other government actions, and it also rules on matters such as the removal of members of Congress, the banning of political organizations that seriously violate the constitutional order, and disputes over the calling of plebiscites.

The Court was first established in 1970 as an amendment to the 1925 Constitution; it was dissolved after the 1973 coup d'état and was reinstated, with a substantially different design, under the 1980 Constitution. Since a 2005 constitutional reform, it has been composed of ten ministers appointed for staggered nine-year terms by the President of the Republic, the Supreme Court, the Senate, and the Chamber of Deputies. The Court is headquartered in the former Caja de Crédito Hipotecario building at 1234 Huérfanos Street in downtown Santiago.

History

Original tribunal (1970–1973) The Constitutional Court was created by a constitutional reform to the 1925 Constitution enacted on 23 January 1970, and signed into law by President Eduardo Frei Montalva. According to legal scholar Sergio Verdugo, the reform was in part the product of a miscalculated bet by its drafters, who expected a different candidate to win the presidency that year; once in operation, the tribunal generally worked in favor of the unexpectedly elected president, Salvador Allende, and its influence waned when it declined to intervene in the constitutional crisis that preceded the 1973 coup. Between 1971 and 1973, the tribunal sat on the mezzanine of the building of the Caja Autónoma de Amortización, on the west side of Bandera Street in Santiago.

The tribunal was dissolved by decree-law No. 119, issued on 10 November 1973, by the military junta that had seized power that September.

Reinstatement under the 1980 Constitution The 1980 Constitution reinstated the Court. Until 2005, some of its members were appointed by the National Security Council, a civil-military body. A constitutional reform that year substantially changed the Court's composition and powers, increasing its membership from seven to ten justices and giving the President of the Republic, the Supreme Court, the Senate, and the Chamber of Deputies a greater role in their appointment.

Seat

From 1981 the Court sat in a room on the third floor of the former National Congress building; in 1989 it moved to the sixth floor of a building on Morandé Street. Between December 2000 and 2012 it occupied the Casa de Velasco, and it then moved temporarily to a corporate building on Avenida Apoquindo in the Las Condes commune while its permanent headquarters was prepared. Since 2015 the Court has been headquartered in the former Caja de Crédito Hipotecario building at 1234 Huérfanos Street, in the Santiago commune.

Jurisdiction and functions According to the Chilean constitution, the Court's principal function is to rule on whether laws are unconstitutional, that is, whether they conflict with constitutionally established rights and freedoms. This applies not only to legislative acts but also to judicial rules (autoacordados), presidential decrees with the force of law, and ordinary decrees that the Comptroller General has objected to as unconstitutional.

The Court's other principal functions include: exercising mandatory, preventive review of interpretive laws, constitutional organic laws, and treaty provisions covering matters proper to organic laws, before their promulgation; ruling on the constitutionality of a legal provision as applied in a specific judicial or administrative proceeding (inaplicabilidad), and, separately, declaring such a provision unconstitutional outright once it has been found inapplicable; resolving constitutional questions raised during the passage of bills, constitutional reforms, or international treaties; ruling on the constitutionality of decrees with the force of law and of other supreme decrees, at the request of the President; ruling on complaints that the President has failed to promulgate a law or has promulgated a text different from the one constitutionally required; declaring the unconstitutionality of organizations, movements, or political parties that seriously undermine the constitutional order, and the personal responsibility of those involved; resolving jurisdictional disputes between political or administrative authorities and the courts; ruling on questions of eligibility, incompatibility, and removal affecting cabinet ministers and members of Congress; and informing the Senate on the physical or mental incapacity of the President or President-elect, and on the validity of a presidential resignation.

The Court can also convene, or advise on the constitutionality of, national plebiscites, at the request of the Senate or Chamber of Deputies.

Organization

Composition and appointment The Constitutional Court is composed of ten members, called ministers: 3 appointed by the President of the Republic; 3 elected by the Supreme Court in a secret vote; 2 elected by the Senate by a two-thirds majority of sitting senators; and 2 proposed by the Chamber of Deputies by a two-thirds majority and approved or rejected by the Senate by the same margin.

Members serve nine-year terms, staggered so that roughly a third of the Court is renewed every three years, and they cannot be reappointed, except for a replacement minister who has served for less than five years. Candidates must have practiced law for at least 15 years, have distinguished themselves in professional, academic, or public life, and have no legal disqualification from serving as a judge; ministers must retire at age 75 and are subject to the constitutional incompatibilities applicable to members of Congress and the judiciary.

Before the 2005 reform, the Court had only seven members: three ministers chosen by the Supreme Court, one lawyer designated by the President, one lawyer chosen by the Senate, and two lawyers chosen by the National Security Council.

Plenary, chambers, and the casting vote The Court can sit as a full plenary (Pleno) or split into two chambers (Salas). Because it has an even number of members, tied votes are possible; in that case, the Court's president casts a deciding, or "dirimente," vote that counts twice. Some Chilean constitutional scholars, including Humberto Nogueira Alcalá, have argued that constitutional tribunals should generally have an odd number of members precisely to avoid such deadlocks, a criticism raised again in 2026 after the Court's president cast the deciding vote in three separate provisions of the "Escuelas Protegidas" school-safety bill.

Substitute ministers If the Court cannot reach the required quorum because a titular minister is unable to sit, substitute ministers (suplentes de ministro) may replace ministers and sit in the Plenary or chambers. Two substitute ministers are appointed every three years by the President of the Republic, with the agreement of two-thirds of the Senate, from a list of seven candidates proposed by the Constitutional Court following a public competition based on objective, public, transparent and non-discriminatory criteria. Substitute ministers are assigned to the Plenary or chambers according to an order of precedence established by public lottery. They have the same prohibitions, obligations and grounds for disqualification as titular ministers, and must devote at least half a working day to their duties; their monthly remuneration is 50% of that of a titular minister. The system was established by Law No. 20,381 of 28 October 2009, which replaced the previous system of abogados integrantes ("substitute attorneys"). Under that system, the Court elected its abogados integrantes by secret ballot for three-year terms.

Current composition As of September 2026, the Court's ten titular ministers are:

Name Appointed by Term began Term ends Notes Miguel Ángel Fernández González President of the Republic (Sebastián Piñera) 30 July 2018 30 July 2027 María Pía Silva Gallinato Supreme Court 3 July 2018 3 July 2027 President of the Court since July 2026 Daniela Marzi Muñoz President of the Republic (Gabriel Boric) 9 May 2022 9 May 2031 President of the Court, 2024–2026 Nancy Yáñez Fuenzalida President of the Republic (Gabriel Boric) 9 May 2022 9 May 2031 President of the Court, 2022–2024 Raúl Mera Muñoz Supreme Court 30 August 2023 30 August 2030 Chosen by public competition to complete the term of the late minister Rodrigo Pica Flores Héctor Mery Romero Senate 18 January 2024 18 January 2033 Catalina Lagos Tschorne Senate 18 January 2024 18 January 2033 Expected to become President of the Court in 2027 Marcela Peredo Rojas Chamber of Deputies 18 January 2024 18 January 2033 Alejandra Precht Rorris Chamber of Deputies 25 January 2024 25 January 2033 Mario Gómez Montoya Supreme Court 8 November 2024 28 July 2029

María Pía Silva Gallinato was sworn in as President of the Court on 13 July 2026, succeeding Daniela Marzi Muñoz, who had led the Court since 2024. Silva was elected for the first part of the Court's two-year presidential period, with Catalina Lagos Tschorne elected at the same time to succeed her for the remaining period.

Presidents of the Court Name Period Enrique Silva Cimma 1971–1973 Israel Bórquez Montero 1981–1985 José María Eyzaguirre Echeverría 1985–1989 Luis Maldonado Boggiano 1989–1991 Marcos Aburto Ochoa 1991–1995 Manuel Jiménez Bulnes 1995–1997 Osvaldo Faúndez Vallejos 1997–2001 Juan Colombo Campbell 2001–2005 José Luis Cea Egaña 2005–2007 Juan Colombo Campbell 2007–2009 Marcelo Venegas Palacios 2009–2011 Raúl Bertelsen Repetto 2011–2013 Marisol Peña Torres 2013–2014 Carlos Carmona Santander 2014–2017 Iván Aróstica Maldonado 2017–2019 María Luisa Brahm Barril 2019–2021 Juan José Romero Guzmán 2021–2022 Cristián Letelier Aguilar 2022 Nancy Yáñez Fuenzalida 2022–2024 Daniela Marzi Muñoz 2024–2026 María Pía Silva Gallinato 2026–2027 Catalina Lagos Tschorne 2027–2028

Notable rulings

Election Certification Tribunal (1985) In reviewing the draft Organic Constitutional Law on the Election Certification Tribunal (Tricel), the Court held, by a narrow 4–3 majority, that the electoral tribunal had to be functioning before the 1988 plebiscite rather than only from the 1989 parliamentary elections. The Court relied on a systematic interpretation of the Constitution, treating it as an organic whole rather than allowing the literal wording of a transitional provision to prevent the electoral tribunal from operating during the plebiscite. The decision therefore helped establish the institutional framework under which the 1988 plebiscite was conducted.

Emergency contraception (2008) The Court struck down provisions of a 2007 Ministry of Health decree that required Chile's public health system to make certain forms of hormonal emergency contraception available, including the "morning-after pill." The majority held that the challenged provisions violated the constitutional protection of the right to life. Because the ruling was issued through the Court's abstract constitutional review procedure, it applied generally rather than only to the parties in a particular case.

Isapre risk-factor tables (2010)