Leer en Español
WITH ONLY three days to go before the exit plebiscite, Chile is at a crossroads that will define the future of the country; citizens will have to decide on September 4 between approving or rejecting a new Constitution full of loopholes that could leave the most important decisions of that nation in the hands of the radical left.
On September 1, The Washington Post dedicated its editorial to the South American country to tell Chileans that the best option is to reject the new Constitution, due to all the concerns generated by the text drafted by the Convention.
According to specialists, this potential constitution initially threatens private property, investments, security, and economic stability in Chile.
Opponents of the new constitution object that its designation of Chile as “plurinational” (intended to empower the Indigenous one-eighth of the population) would undermine national cohesion. Others worry that uncertainty will hinder investment while a new congress tries to translate new constitutional provisions on mining and other natural resources into legislation. Then there is the complexity of a document that consists of 54,000 words, 388 articles, and 178 pages — including a provision on the state’s duty to “promote the culinary and gastronomic heritage of the country,” WaPo reads.
The Post says that what happens in Chile could have an impact on the region and especially on the United States due to the commercial ties between the two countries, as the South American nation has the largest lithium reserves in the world and there is a possibility that the new Constitution will reformulate the legal framework for mining, affecting a free trade agreement between the two nations.
Changing the New Constitution will be mission impossible
According to the latest polls, the “Reject” option has the support of the majority, while “Approve” (supported by the majority of the ruling parties) has led a campaign to sow the message that it would be possible to reform the new Constitution in the short term; however, these same “Approve” parties have admitted that the new text has errors and gaps, and have even promoted the option of approving the new Constitution and then modifying it.
Analysts, politicians, and constitutionalists refute the “Approve” militants and assure that the statement “approve to reform” is not in line with reality.
In principle, the new constitution will have to be complemented with 61 new laws and 73 regulatory adjustments that will be left in the hands of the legislators in office. In addition to this, there are a series of limitations that will not allow the text to be improved in the short or medium term.
The text establishes that indigenous peoples must give their consent in matters that suppress their constitutional rights; it also states that they must be consulted in administrative and legislative measures.
“Indigenous peoples and nations shall be consulted and shall give their free, prior and informed consent in those matters or issues that affect their rights recognized in this Constitution,” states Article 191 of the text approved by the convention. This means that in practice the indigenous communities will ensure that nothing will change without them, while having veto power will ensure that all regulations will be legislated in their favor and not in favor of the Chilean people in general.
Senator Ximena Rincón, of the Christian Democratic Party, explained that it will be very difficult to reach a quorum with the new legislative system to eventually reform the Constitution.
“The threshold set by this proposal is so high (…) the first 2/3 will be needed, if the 2/3 will not be achieved it will be 4/7, plus plebiscite plus the consent of the native peoples in all the matters that will affect them and all of them appeared to them”, Rincón said.
Ximena Rincón:"Hay algunos que dicen 'aprobar para reformar' y se olvidan que el umbral que pone esta propuesta es tan alto. 2/3, o 4/7 más consentimiento de los pueblos. Se quiere aprobar un texto que no hay posibilidad que se reformule"
📡 T13 EN VIVO » https://t.co/tdFda9tz69 pic.twitter.com/AFhvvU2NhY
— T13 (@T13) July 7, 2022
“Let’s tell the truth, they want to approve a text that is not good for the country and there is no possibility of reformulating it because what is being done is to put a bigger lock than the current Constitution (…) here they want to take us down a path of no return”, said Rincón.
If “Aprobe” wins the country’s future will be in the hands of the radical left
The new text has some “traps” that put democracy in jeopardy. For example, the vote of indigenous people will be worth up to three times more than that of a Chilean who does not identify with an ethnic group. Likewise, through a system of seats reserved for native peoples, a radical ideology will be able to take power thanks to a simple majority.
The new constitution states that the native peoples have reserved seats and that these seats can increase depending on the number of people who are considered to have indigenous blood. If the number of the native population increases, it will also break the number of seats with the great possibility that they will have more power and influence leaving big decisions that concern the whole country in the hands of a minority.
This represents a great danger to the country, as it implies a disadvantage for the majority of Chileans who do not identify with any ethnic group, putting the Chilean democratic system at risk.
Article 252 of the new Constitution establishes that “the Congress is composed of a number of not less than one hundred and fifty-five members elected in direct voting by electoral districts”, which means that this number of legislators may increase.
Paragraph 3 of this article states: “The seats reserved in the Congress of Deputies for indigenous peoples and nations shall be elected in a single national district. Their number shall be defined in proportion to the indigenous population in relation to the total population of the country. They must be added to the total number of members of Congress. The law shall regulate the requirements, procedures and distribution of the reserved seats”.
CH01. SANTIAGO (CHILE), 08/20/2022.- Dozens of people participate in a march to Plaza Italia in rejection of the upcoming constitutional plebiscite today, in Santiago (Chile). (EFE)
In fact, Article 252 does not establish any restriction for indigenous peoples, opening the possibility that, as the number of people who consider themselves indigenous increases, to some extent the number of reserved seats will also increase, thus being able to control the Chamber of Deputies and with it the decisions that concern an entire country.
“In Chile, what we are doing is handing a loaded weapon to anyone who wants, in the medium term, to take power from an authoritarian point of view,” said former Chilean presidential candidate Sebastián Sichel.
Sichel expressed that “most democracies in the world have protected themselves from authoritarianism because they have good constitutional bodies”, but added that if the new Constitution is approved, there will be great probabilities that “anyone” could take an authoritarian position in power.
The most controversial rules
Farewell to the Senate: one of the most discussed rules has to do with the elimination of the Senate and a new structure of the Legislative Branch, composed of the Congress of Deputies and the Chamber of Regions.
It will not be a country, but a plurination: according to the draft, the autonomous regions, autonomous communes, indigenous territorial autonomies and special territories will have “legal personality and their own patrimony and the powers and competencies necessary to govern themselves in the general interest of the Republic”.
Special” justice for indigenous peoples: another of the articles that also generated debate is the one related to “legal pluralism”. The norm allows the creation of courts for indigenous peoples that would coexist coordinated in a National Justice System. However, critics point out that this would generate a parallel justice system that would put an end to the principle of “equality before the law” and would unduly benefit the native peoples.
Private property and expropriation with ” fair payment”: the text of the Convention establishes in Article 20, point 256: “No person may be deprived of his property except by virtue of a law authorizing expropriation for a public purpose or in the general interest declared by the legislature. The owner shall always have the right to be compensated for the fair price of the property expropriated”.
This article has generated more doubts than answers among the population, and in general has caused concern among the working class who feel that at any moment their home, land or business could be expropriated under the allegation of “being of public utility”.
But the fear of losing a property is not the only risk that is established in the text, because when it talks about compensating for the “fair price”, however, it is not detailed how, by whom and on what basis the amount of payment would be calculated.
And what about workers’ savings: the particular case of the pension fund administrators (AFP) generates total uncertainty, since the new text makes no reference to them, leaving a great void as to what will happen to workers’ money.
This is a loophole that later, if the new text is approved, could be interpreted at the convenience of the Government or officials in office.
Chile at risk
“There are many risks, among them the end of equality before the law, because it consecrates the division between indigenous and non-indigenous to access, no longer to the judiciary, but to the so-called ‘justice systems’; in addition, within the non-indigenous there is a separation between men and women, because the courts are instructed to do justice with a gender focus, which is nothing more than privileging a certain group over another,” Javier Silva Salas, a Chilean political analyst explained to El American.
“The right to property is relativized, now the state will no longer pay market price when expropriating, but will do so with a ‘fair price’, something that sounds nice, but since the time of the late scholastics we know does not exist, as Diego de Covarrubias y Leyva said,” he added.
“The system of individual capitalization is being abolished, which opens a loophole in economic terms and will also expropriate from the workers the fruits of their labor, which was previously destined for individual savings for old age,” the analyst said.
Sabrina Martín Rondon is a Venezuelan journalist. Her source is politics and economics. She is a specialist in corporate communications and is committed to the task of dismantling the supposed benefits of socialism // Sabrina Martín Rondon es periodista venezolana. Su fuente es la política y economía. Es especialista en comunicaciones corporativas y se ha comprometido con la tarea de desmontar las supuestas bondades del socialismo