We invite you to read the column written by our partner, Gabriel Zaliasnik, on access to private conversations and their leaks in the media.
The Italian comedy Perfect Strangers by Paolo Genovese revolves around a group of friends who, during a dinner, decide to share the contents of their mobile phones, revealing hidden aspects of their lives. By bringing to light information that would normally remain private, conflicts and tensions arise.
The plot closely parallels the widespread leaks of private WhatsApp conversations in the media. Just like in the film, the public exposure of personal communications turns private life into a reality show that feeds public curiosity. This became evident in the Caso Audio, where conversations unrelated to the judicial investigation were revealed, and now, with the messages of Karol Cariola and Irací Hassler.
Where should the line be drawn between intimate or private conversations—whether political criticisms exchanged between friends, careless remarks, disputes between legal actors, disrespectful or boastful audios within negotiations, or attorney-client privileged discussions—and the constitutional guarantees of privacy and the inviolability of private communications?
The Criminal Procedure Code regulates access to private communications, whether through the seizure of devices containing them or their interception. It establishes that “the investigative actions carried out by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the police shall remain confidential to third parties unrelated to the proceedings” (Article 182). Additionally, Article 223 states that any communication deemed irrelevant to an investigation must be returned to the affected party, and the Public Prosecutor’s Office must destroy any transcripts or copies.
What then justifies the dissemination of illegally leaked conversations in the media? Freedom of the press cannot be the answer, as the analogy with the crimes of receiving stolen goods and money laundering is clear. Both legal frameworks seek to prevent the free circulation of the proceeds of criminal acts by disrupting the illicit chain. A similar approach should be taken regarding private communications illegally obtained. Responsibility should fall not only on those who leak the information but also on those who knowingly publish it despite its illicit origin.
If there is a lesson to be learned from these repeated leaks, it is that the time has come to put an end to political sensationalism and restore respect for privacy, as an essential pillar of institutional trust and public confidence. Communications are no exception to this principle. Just like in the film, we can all be “perfect strangers”, and we have the right to demand respect for the privacy of our communications and their confidentiality if they are irrelevant. Otherwise, the rule of law will become nothing more than an empty promise.
Column written by:
Gabriel Zaliasnik | Partner | gzaliasnik@az.cl
