Chile Votes to Rewrite its Constitution
People with Chilean flags take part in a rally ahead of Sunday's referendum, in Santiago, on Oct. 22. Chileans will be asked two questions: if they want a new constitution and who should draft it. Source.
Just one year ago, protests and civil unrest ensued in Chile’s capital city of Santiago after a recent increase in the city’s public transportation fares. Videos of buildings set ablaze and of violent encounters between the police and protesters captured the attention of the international media. Many around the world likely wondered why an increase in local public transportation fares led to such public discontent and chaos. To an outside observer, such an increase may seem insignificant, but to the protesters in Santiago, this was yet another reminder of the long-standing economic issues and inequalities in the country.
Following these protests, the National Congress agreed to hold a national referendum to decide whether or not to draft a new constitution to replace the current one written in 1980 during the country’s period under a military dictatorship. After being postponed several months due to the pandemic, the referendum was finally held two Sundays ago, October 25th, and the voters overwhelmingly approved of drafting a new constitution, written by a constitutional assembly made up of everyday citizens.
To understand the broader significance of last week’s vote, it is helpful to first review why the 1980 constitution has long been under scrutiny and remains so unpopular decades later. To start, the 1980 national referendum that allowed for it to be written was widely considered to be fraudulent, as it occurred under the reign of the brutal dictator Augusto Pinochet. Since the transition to democracy following his rule, Pinochet has been a symbol of evil and of the darkest period in the country’s history in which thousands were the victims of torture, executions, or forced disappearances. At the very least, last Sunday’s referendum carried symbolic significance as a way for Chile to fully erase any remnants of Pinochet’s rule.
More important, however, to today’s discontent with the constitution are its specific provisions that continue to meaningfully affect the lives of Chileans. These include provisions that privatized healthcare, education, and pensions. Many of these reforms were advocated by neoliberal economists of the time who believed that these changes would spur economic development.
The outcomes of the Chilean economic experiment remain heavily debated today. Chile has in fact achieved remarkable economic growth and reductions in poverty levels since democratization. In 2010, it became the first South American country to gain membership in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental body made up of only highly-developed member states. However, Chile has also been plagued by extreme economic inequality in this same period and is the single most unequal of the 37 OECD countries.
For those who voted in favor of a new constitution, they hope this will lead to structural changes that will better serve the interests of all groups within Chilean society. One specific goal they hope to achieve in a new constitution is recognition of indigenous groups like the Mapuche and their claims to land. In fact, there are a number of seats reserved for Mapuche delegates in the constitutional assembly. Additionally, half of the delegates must be women.
While last Sunday’s vote was certainly a sign of hope for most Chileans, it was only the beginning of what is sure to be a long political battle. 155 seats must be filled for the assembly, and we can expect that many of the candidates will be promising much more than they can realistically achieve, given how difficult it will be to gain widespread agreement on every provision in the constitution. The final draft will then again be put forth to the voters in a national referendum, and if rejected, Chile will return to the current Pinochet-era constitution.