The Constitutional Court has intervened in the ongoing Puerto Coronel case involving Boris Chamorro, triggering a direct procedural conflict between defense attorneys and the Public Prosecutor’s Office over whether the upcoming oral trial preparation remains viable.
The Bottom Line
- Defense counsel Fernando Saenger asserts that a Constitutional Court filing has fully suspended all proceedings, including the scheduled November 13 oral trial preparation.
- Prosecutor Glenda Lagos maintains that the high court’s intervention narrowly restricts only the notification sent to the Electoral Service (Servel) regarding the post held by Boris Chamorro.
- The Coronel Guarantee Court now faces the task of resolving this procedural standoff before prosecutors can advance the litigation.
Constitutional Challenge Halts Legal Momentum
The legal friction centers on a recent filing submitted to the Constitutional Court by attorney Fernando Saenger, who represents Boris Chamorro. The defense action challenges the constitutionality of statutory rules mandating the suspension of mayors when formally charged with specific offenses. In this prosecution, Boris Chamorro faces allegations of bribery linked to the Puerto Coronel investigation.
Saenger reviewed existing jurisprudence and determined that the suspension mechanism violates constitutional guarantees and international treaties. Consequently, his team filed an inapplicability appeal. The Constitutional Court formally admitted the request and issued a decree ordering the “suspension of the proceeding,” a directive that Saenger interprets as a complete halt to the active case file.
“The court admitted the processing and now has suspended the proceeding,” Saenger stated. He added that the measures dictate that no further steps can occur—specifically the oral trial preparation—until the Constitutional Court issues a final ruling on the constitutional challenge.
Prosecution Maintains Schedule for November Hearing
The Public Prosecutor’s Office reads the high court’s directive through a much narrower lens. Prosecutor Glenda Lagos offered a distinct interpretation of the procedural freeze, arguing that the resolution specifically targets only administrative communications.
According to Lagos, the suspension applies exclusively to the formal notice that the Guarantee Court must transmit to the Electoral Service (Servel). That specific notice requests the temporary suspension of Boris Chamorro from his duties while criminal proceedings move forward. Lagos stated that the Coronel Guarantee Court must refrain from issuing that specific notice to Servel for now, but she emphasized that the broader criminal proceeding remains active. Under that interpretation, the oral trial preparation hearing scheduled for November 13 remains entirely in place.
Defense Alignment and the Guarantee Court Intervention
Defense attorneys representing other co-defendants in the Puerto Coronel proceedings have stepped into the debate to back the interpretation advanced by Saenger. These defense lawyers argue that the Public Prosecutor’s Office cannot legally push the litigation forward while the Constitutional Court evaluates the core constitutional question.
Because the prosecution and the defense hold irreconcilable views on the scope of the constitutional tribunal’s order, the dispute has created a procedural bottleneck. With prosecutors insisting the November 13 calendar date stands and defense teams arguing the entire docket is frozen, the Coronel Guarantee Court must now intervene and issue a formal ruling to settle the conflict.
