The political reaction was immediate. Deputy Alejandro Bernales, president of the Fisheries Commission, announced the summons of authorities to clarify the destination of the resources and determine if there were irregularities. He even warned that, if misuse of funds is proven, legal liability could result. From the Chilean opposition, parliamentarians from sectors such as the Independent Democratic Union and National Renewal described the situation as an “unacceptable interference” and proposed to review and even repeal the Lafkenche Law.
The debate, however, also reopened a broader discussion: the balance between economic development and indigenous rights. While critics argue that the regulations ended up leading to prolonged investment blockades, from the now former government of Gabriel Boric they defended their relevance for the protection of marine ecosystems and ancestral territories. Along these lines, communist deputy Nathalie Castillo stressed the importance of safeguarding these spaces and questioned
attempts to retreat in environmental matters.In the midst of the controversy, the Norwegian ambassador to Chile, Per Anders Nilsen, ruled out any type of direct state interference. He explained that the project was developed between 2004 and 2014 and that it did not represent his country's current politics. In addition, he noted that in Norway, civil society organizations can access public funding for international initiatives with autonomy from the government, stressing that regulatory decisions belong exclusively to Chile
.









