15. That article appears to be merely an expression of aspirations, because any precept without a sanction is a sort of bell without a clapper or a guitar without strings, but in any case it is out of place in a democratic and republican legal system, and it is necessary to highlight this in order to avoid any practical consequences of its undesirable presence in the law. 16. On a separate issue – and also obiter dictum – I consider it necessary to state that, as a general principle limiting any obligation to report an offense, the basic rule that must be followed is that this obligation must never be taken to the extreme of placing a person in the dilemma of being punished or letting themselves die. 17. The human rights hierarchy necessarily places life above the requirements for efficiency of any administration of justice and, if there is a conflict, the right to life must evidently have priority over the interests of the State in punishing those who break its laws. 18. It can be seen that article 312 of the Criminal Code did not violate this rule because it establishes the reporting obligation of the physician when the injuries should reasonably be considered to result from an offense - the injuries suffered result from an offense; in other words, injuries that someone has inflicted on the patient. Thus, in principle, this only refers to the injuries of a victim, a provision that is especially relevant in cases of domestic violence or of incapacitated victims. For example, the injuries that someone suffers as a result of a defensive action by the police do not result from an offense, because the action of the police in legitimate defense is not a crime. 19. Article 232 of the Procedural Code does not violate the aforementioned basic rule because it exempts from the reporting obligation cases in which it is precluded by professional secrecy, and this includes the situation in which reporting confronts someone with that dilemma. 20. Any notitia criminis that resulted in a trial based on a complaint filed in violation of the obligation of professional secrecy would constitute a reason for its nullity pursuant to the principle that a criminal action can never be undertaken – or a sentence executed – based on an unlawful act. 21. The latter principle, according to which the effectiveness of the law cannot be sought by means of its violation, encompasses all criminal procedural law, because many other consequences that lead to nullities arise from this, such as the consequences emanating from the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine of the United States Supreme Court and the rejection of the strange doctrine of male captus bene detentus or, a little more remotely, in the case of the agent provocateur and the more problematic undercover agent. 22. I consider that these reflections obiter dicta define the scope of the findings made in this judgment, and this is why I have made them. This is how I have voted. Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni Judge Pablo Saavedra Alessandri Secretary 6