Election of the Constitutional Council in Chile: The right and center right will take full control with 33 seats

Today, May 7th, 2023, Chileans went to the polls to elect the members of the Constitutional Council, in a historic election that has left a bittersweet taste in the ruling party.

The Republican Party, led by José Antonio Kast, has become the great winner of election day, obtaining 36% of the votes and becoming the most voted party in Chile. This result is only comparable with the records of the Christian Democrats in the early 1990s.

The right and the center right have managed to take full control of the Constitutional Council, with 33 of the seats (of the total of 51 members), which allows them to achieve the 3/5 necessary to make important decisions. For its part, the Approve Dignity pact, led by Gabriel Boric, has managed to maintain its pulse and obtain 27% of the votes.

However, the great disappointment of the day has been the very poor performance of the parties of the former Concertación, which have not managed to obtain any seats. This leaves the ruling party in the minority in votes, percentages and seats.

Although the participation figure has been lower than in the Plebiscite, with 16% null votes and 4.5% white votes, this election has been the second most attended in the history of Chile. This shows that Chileans are committed to the democratic process and want to actively participate in making important decisions for the country.

This election has also raised several questions about interest in the process and what will happen in the December exit plebiscite. It is important that citizens are informed and actively participate in electoral processes, so that they can make informed decisions and contribute to the development of a more just and equitable society.

Constitutional Convention and Yellows for Chile

Many things have happened in recent months in the Constitutional Convention that began its work on July 4th, 2021.

It took three months to draft the General Regulations of the Convention and in the same month of October 2021 the constitutional debates began in the commissions created to deal with different issues.

In February, the Constitutional Convention approved an article of the new Constitution that declares Chile as a "regional, plurinational and intercultural State" during the vote they take to determine the norms that the Magna Carta will include.

"Chile is a regional, plurinational and intercultural State made up of autonomous territorial entities, within a framework of equity and solidarity among all of them, preserving the unity and integrity of the State," indicated the article approved by 112 votes in favor, 34 against and 2 abstentions.

The new article changes the definition of "unitary State" that is indicated in the current Chilean Constitution that was implemented in 1980, during the government of Augusto Pinochet (1973-1990).

The proposal exceeded 2/3 of the vote, the minimum required to be included in the draft of the new Constitution that must be voted on in a mandatory plebiscite in which the population of Chile will decide whether to approve or reject it. If rejected, the current Magna Carta approved in 1980 will remain.

The Convention also approved other paragraphs in which it defines the territorial organization of the State "in autonomous regions, indigenous territorial autonomies and special territories." It also promotes the "cooperation, integration and development" of the regions, and defines criteria for the creation of regional entities that will rule in those areas.

The constituents approved 10 articles dealing with justice issues; among them, changing the name of the Judiciary to Justice Systems, and another article that guarantees that all bodies and persons involved in judicial processes must ensure equality, parity, and a gender perspective. The latter has caused a lot of concern since it would be annulling the principle of equality before the law.

The Constitutional Convention began its task on July 4th, 2021 and has a maximum term of nine months, extendable for three more, to conclude its task of giving Chile a new Constitution.

Yellows for Chile

Since the voting began in the plenary session of the Constitutional Convention in Chile, a group of academics and former ministers, mainly from the Center Left, have reacted to some ideas that are quite far from what the majority of Chileans expected from this new project.

This group of personalities who has achieved growing support has even announced a movement, which they have baptized "Amarillos por Chile", managing to gather signatures and support, all from various positions in politics, education, culture and governments of different democratic tendencies. "The spirit that must prevail in the Convention must be that of dialogue, conversation, truly listening to those who think differently," they say in their letter, led by Cristián Warnken, the columnist and former television presenter.

Over time, it has been confirmed that some constituents support very radical ideas such as dissolving the three powers of the State (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) to create a Plurinational Assembly.

Said initiative contemplated excluding the following groups from the right to vote in the base assemblies: owners of large companies, bankers and speculators, the high hierarchy of the church, the officers of the Armed Forces and the management of large companies.

Fortunately, sanity prevailed and this idea was rejected by a large majority. However, there are many other initiatives that put our current republic at risk.

You might also be interested in: The Socialist Experience in Chile 

Yellows for Chile: a new movement is born made up of more than 70 personalities, including national prize-winners, academics, economists and former ministers of the Concertación (centre-left political group) organized in response to the danger of the "refounding" of Chile " right from the start".
"The great tragedies in our continent and in the entire world have occurred when we yellows have been silenced or have not raised our voice with sufficient conviction," says the founding document of this new citizen movement in one of its paragraphs.

The group's manifesto argues that there are refoundational spirits expressed especially in the Constitutional Convention. Faced with this, the subscribers suggest, it is necessary to raise "the voice" in favor of "dialogue and conversation."

"Many of the proposals that have emanated from the commissions and some of those that are already reaching 2/3 in plenary are turning on the alert signal among those of us who do not want the deconstruction of Chile, nor its dismemberment, nor its refoundation from scratch. ", they pose. "The spirit that must prevail in the Convention must be that of dialogue, conversation, truly listening to those who think differently."

They add that the yellows are "a silent majority in the country," who want "reforms, not revolution, not an inharmonious or biased Constitution, but a new balanced Constitution." That constitutional proposal, they argue, should move away from the "failed experiments of other Latin American countries." Instead, it should reconcile "order with freedom, change with stability, as one of our intellectual fathers of the country, Andrés Bello, dreamed and thought."

Support the initiative

There are also a number of economic figures who were authorities during the Concertación governments, such as former Finance Ministers Alejandro Foxley and Andrés Velasco; the former president of the Central Bank and former Minister of Economy José De Gregorio; and other former ministers such as Alejandro Ferreiro, Vivianne Blanlot, Ignacio Walker, Jorge Burgos, René Cortázar, Mariana Aylwin, Jaime Campos, Isidro Solís, Pedro García, José Joaquín Brunner and Enrique Krauss.

The list also includes representatives of Congress. Among them are the outgoing DC senator Carolina Goic, the incoming ex-DC deputy Andrés Jouannet, and former senators such as Soledad Alvear, Eugenio Tuma, Hernán Vodanovic and Fulvio Rossi.

The professor and poet Cristián Warnken Lihn comments that the group is made up mostly of people from the center and center-left, who do not want the country to be thrown overboard, but rather to make changes: but well done. This is not a political party, it is an open, citizen movement of very diverse people with no hidden agenda."

The following are excerpts from the "Amarillos por Chile" manifesto. The complete version can be reviewed at the end of this article, with the list of the 75 subscribers and their call for adhesions:

The denomination "yellow" emerged a long time ago in our country as an insult to those who were in favor of change, but in a gradual and responsible manner, and preferred the path of reforms to that of revolution, that of dialogue with those who think differently than the idea of ​​turning the political adversary into an enemy to be destroyed. In the midst of the refoundational euphoria that wants to start from scratch, it is usual for the voice of the yellows to try to be silenced, and radicalism and maximalism seem much more attractive than prudence and realism. But in the desire for social transformations, there is not only the impulse towards the impossible (typical of utopias), we yellows feel the passion for what is possible, which consists in doing things well done, achieving the necessary changes without destroying what is good, betting for a better future without thinking that you are starting from scratch.

The great tragedies in our continent and in the entire world have occurred when we yellows have been silenced or have not raised our voices with sufficient conviction (as in the face of the legitimization of political violence, for example), making us feel self-conscious before those who shout more and build a version of reality as a Manichaean story, dividing the world into good guys and bad guys and offering simplistic solutions to complex problems.

Many of the proposals that have emanated from the commissions and some of those that are already reaching 2/3 in plenary are turning on the alert signal among those of us who do not want the deconstruction of Chile, nor its dismemberment, nor its refoundation from scratch, but a new beginning that collects the best that we have all built together in these decades and improves in an efficient and intelligent way what needs to be improved.

For this, the spirit that must prevail in the Convention must be that of dialogue, conversation, truly listening to those who think differently.

In this sense, the attempt by some radicalized factions of the Convention to ignore, and even erase, a significant political sector of the country (the center-right), as the maximalists of that time tried to do in the 1980 Constitution, is a huge political mistake. We must not forget that this sector obtained a very important vote in the last legislative election and 44% in the presidential election. Can a viable Constitution be made without including or listening to that sector, as if it did not exist? Proposing an exclusive constitutional text that was not born from genuine dialogue and listening also to the minority would be a pyrrhic victory that would not ensure a long life for said Constitution and would only help to polarize the country even more.

The "yellows" have always existed. We are -so we believe- a silent majority of the country. We demonstrated in the recent presidential election and with our vote we forced the extremes to moderate. This country is -deep down- more yellow than it seems. He wants reforms, not revolution, not an inharmonious or biased Constitution, but a new balanced Constitution, that gathers the best of our own institutional tradition (and not the copy of failed experiments in other Latin American countries), that manages to reconcile order with freedom , change with stability, as one of our intellectual fathers of the country, Andrés Bello, dreamed and thought.

We yellows have decided to raise our voice to contribute to this fundamental crossroads of our political and institutional history. We are here to support any initiative that goes in the direction of balance, moderation, common sense, unrestricted respect for Democracy (without surnames), the Rule of Law, freedom and also the promotion of social rights, reforming and improving both the market and the state. And we will loudly raise our voice against any attempt to lead us down the wrong path to repeat failed refoundational experiments in all parts of the world. Against any type of enlightenment, we reaffirm our trust in the light of dialogue and reason, which made it possible for this country to exist as a country and for democracy to re-emerge after the long night of intolerance and dictatorship.

This is our first statement, but it won't be the last. We want many Chileans who today feel politically orphaned to know that we Yellows are here and now, at this decisive moment in our history. We invite all free and democratic spirits to join this initiative without complexes, fear or mistrust. This is the time for courage, not cowardice or resignation.

Manifesto "Yellows for Chile"

Mario Waissbluth

For his part, academic Mario Waissbluth (professor at the University of Chile) mentions that the convention has exceeded the issue of indigenous rights, since this group is a minimal percentage of the population of Chile and it seems that the Constitution is designed only for them, where they are assigned excessive participation and rights.

This is exacerbated by the excessive representation of parties of the most radical left.

Along these lines, Waissbluth maintained that the "plan is to start making specific observations on specific articles of the Constitution and not only to criticize, but also to counter-propose."

"What we have agreed upon is that we are going to have a communications group, and a technical group that from now on will begin to analyze article by article, give an opinion and make a counterproposal and spread it through all the channels that we can".

At the time of publication of this article, the group has already achieved more than 22,000 adherents.

Source: Pauta, Amarillos por Chile and author's notes

Constitutional Convention in Chile

This historic constituent process began on November 15th, 2019 when the majority of the political parties with representation in Congress reached an agreement to start the path towards an eventual new Constitution.

This implied a plebiscite so that the citizens, when asked "Do you want a New Constitution?", decide between two options: I approve or I reject to start this process of drafting the new Constitution and how the body that would draft it would be made up.

The Convention, made up of 155 elected members, will have 9 months to present a new constitutional text, which may be extended for 3 more months, in a single opportunity. In this way, in mid-2022, the country will experience a new exit referendum to approve or reject the new Constitution.

Plebiscite and its results

On Sunday, October 25th, 2020, the plebiscite that began this constituent process was held, which generated the following results:

78.27% of the citizens who voted in the Plebiscite, approved to start the process of drafting a new Constitution, while the body in charge of doing so will be the Constitutional Convention (made up exclusively of popularly elected members), which was imposed on the Mixed Convention option (made up of elected members and sitting parliamentarians) for 78.99%.

After the Plebiscite of October 25th, 2020, the election of the 155 members of the Constitutional Convention was held on May 15th and 16th, 2021, whose installation was finalized on July 4th, 2021.

Composition and remuneration

The Constitutional Convention was elected according to the same districts used for the election of Deputies (28 districts) and according to a proportional system. In that election, special rules were applied to facilitate the participation of independents and to ensure a gender balance between elected men and women. In addition, thanks to a constitutional reform, 17 seats were reserved for representatives of indigenous peoples.

The members of the Convention will receive a monthly remuneration of 50 monthly tax units (app USD 3,450), in addition to the allowances established in the Convention Regulations.

Organization and role

The Constitution states that the Convention will have a President and a Vice President, both elected by an absolute majority of the members of the Convention, as well as a technical secretary made up of people of proven academic or professional suitability. Then, it will be up to the Convention itself to establish the operating rules.

The exclusive purpose of the Convention is to draft and approve a new Constitution, so it cannot intervene or exercise any other function of other bodies or authorities.

In addition, in the drafting of the new Constitution, it must respect the character of the Republic of the State of Chile, its democratic regime, the final and enforceable judicial decisions, and the international treaties in force ratified by Chile.

It has been said that the new Constitution will be written from a "blank page." This means that the Convention must write a new constitutional text and not an amendment to the current Constitution.

Quorum of 2/3

The Convention must approve the norms of the new Constitution and their voting regulations, by a quorum of two thirds of its members in office, since the objective is to generate a high degree of consensus in the constitutional text that will be proposed to vote in the plebiscite of the year 2022.

The convention must draft and approve a proposed text of the new Constitution within a maximum period of nine months, counted from its installation, a period that can be extended for an additional three months, but only once.

👀 You may also be interested in: Crisis in Chile: What has changed after a year of social protests ?

Exit plebiscite

Once the work of the Convention is concluded, it must deliver its proposal to the President of the Republic, who must call a new plebiscite, to be held sixty days after the call is published. In this plebiscite, suffrage will be mandatory and there will be a fine of 0.5 to 3 monthly tax units (app USD 35 to USD 210) for people authorized to vote and who do not. 

The vote will have the following text: "Do you approve the text of the New Constitution proposed by the Constitutional Convention?" Under the question raised there will be two horizontal lines, one for each of the voting options: "Approve" and "Reject".

Approval or rejection of the new Constitution

If approved: The President of the Republic must convene the Plenary Congress so that, in a public and solemn act, it is promulgated and sworn or promised to respect and abide by the New Constitution. Said text will be published in the Official Gazette within ten days after its promulgation and will enter into force on that date.

If rejected: The 1980 Constitution and its reforms remain (without prejudice to the reforms that the National Congress may incorporate as it has done so far).

Can the convention modify the 1980 Constitution?

Its function will be to draft a new constitution project and it will not be able to make changes to the current constitution.

As long as a possible new Constitution does not come into force, the 1980 Constitution will continue to function fully, without the Convention being able to deny it authority or modify it.

Constitution of 1980

After the Military Coup of September 11th, 1973, the Constitution of 1925 was suspended by the Government Military Junta headed by General Augusto Pinochet and a new institution was created. For this, a Commission for the Study of the New Constitution was appointed, made up of seven members.

The Constitutional Draft was delivered in 1978 for review and in 1980, after a second review by the Governing Board, a text of 120 permanent and 29 transitory articles was approved.

This Constitution was approved by a plebiscite on September 11th, 1980, although the absence of electoral records and the restriction of public liberties put the legitimacy of the results in question. Subsequently, on October 21st, 1980, the 1980 Constitution was promulgated and two days later it was published in the Official Gazette, although it would only enter into force 6 months after its plebiscitary approval, that is, on March 11th, 1981.

Constitutional reforms

They were turbulent years in our country politically and socially. Prior to the 1989 parliamentary elections, the Coordination of Parties for Democracy and the right-wing parties agreed on a package of 54 reforms to the 1980 Constitution, which was approved in a plebiscite on July 30th, 1989.

In addition, since 1990, the year of the return to democracy with the assumption of the presidency of Patricio Aylwin, there have been a series of reforms and modifications to this Carta. In fact, until October 2020, the Constitution has been amended 52 times, being modified 257 articles in total.

Source: Library of the National Congress of Chile and notes of the author.

Mechanisms of Constitutional Change in the World

The international experience of the constituent processes shows different mechanisms that have been used for the elaboration of Constitutions, depending on the political circumstances, the political institutional traditions of each country and also on the mechanisms that the same current Constitutions contemplate for said process.

The different mechanisms that have been used worldwide for the discussion and drafting of a new constitutional text are described below.

1) Legislative Power, this name is used to refer to those cases in which the main body in charge of preparing and approving the new constitutional text is the congress or parliament. Parliamentarians can participate in their entirety (Brazil 1988, El Salvador 1992, Korea 1987) or a special commission of parliamentarians can be formed to draft it. The countries that have done so under this last procedure are: Bolivia in 1994, Nicaragua 1995, Angola 2010, Croatia 2000, Greece 1975, Poland 1997, Czech Republic 1993.

2) Constituent Assembly or National Constituent Assembly, is a collegiate body made up of a group of citizens elected by popular vote to exclusively discuss and design a new text and constitutional order and not to exercise legislative powers.

In recent times, the trend has been that the constitutional texts decided and approved by constituent assemblies have been ratified by the citizens through a referendum.

It is the longest way because previously a consultation is needed to decide who are its members and, later, another to approve the text. However, the process has the support of the population, in times of change.

Once they have prepared their work and the constitution enters into force, after approval, their election is without effect and in charge of the legislative power constituted in the last election.

National Congress building, located in the city of Valparaiso, Chile

3) Constituent Commission or Commission of Experts. This type of mechanism refers to those cases in which the institution in charge of the discussion of the contents and the elaboration of the new constitutional text corresponds to a group of experts and persons considered notable in a given society, which generally includes lawyers and / or other professionals related to the area of ​​constitutional law or social sciences.

These could be national and / or foreign experts, and even members of different branches of the State. Unlike the Constituent Assembly, the commission is made up of people appointed and not elected by popular vote.

That designation is usually made by the executive power. The constituent or expert commission is given the power to discuss the contents of the new fundamental carta and the preparation of the text thereof, which must then be ratified, either by the authority or bodies that appointed it, by the legislative power, by the citizens through a plebiscite or referendum, or by more than one of them.

Constitutions synthesize rules and norms that order the social and political coexistence of a community. Until recently, legal theory stated that the longevity of these normative bodies was an essential characteristic of democratic societies, however, comparative studies from the social sciences show that total changes to constitutions occur much more frequently than anticipated.

In fact, between 1947 and 1989, 139 countries wrote new constitutions, while 100 countries did so between 1990 and 2015; And although there are centuries-old constitutional texts, the average longevity of a constitution is only 19 years when we evaluate the behavior of the group of countries in all regions of the planet (Ginsburg, Melton and Elkins, 2010).

 

Furthermore, while in much of the twentieth century the total constitutional changes were linked almost exclusively to changes in the political regime as a result of civil wars, foreign interventions, popular uprisings or institutional collapse, today the number of democracies that decide to promote processes of constitutional change without this being linked to a change of regime (as in the cases of Iceland and Colombia).

Of the 95 constituent processes analyzed between 1947 and 2015, in 25 cases (26%) a constituent assembly was elected to draft the new constitutional text, in 20 (21%) the parliament in office was appointed, in another 9 (10%) a Congress was elected with a specific constituent mandate, in 34 cases (36%) the responsibility was handed over to a commission of experts, and finally 4 (4%) used other mechanisms and in three cases no data was available (3%) .

When we analyze the changes that have been occurring over time, we see that the prevalence of the different mechanisms has changed according to the periods. While between 1947 and 1965 the most used mechanism was the constituent assembly, between 1966 to 1999 expert commissions were used with greater frequency.

In this decade, the constituent assemblies have once again become the predominant mechanism for promoting constitutional changes; used in 7 of the 17 countries that have changed their constitutions between 2000 and 2015.

In relation to the constituent assemblies, it is observed that there is no single model. However, in all the cases analyzed it is a representative institution, similar to a parliament, but which differs from the latter in that it has a specific constituent mandate.

The cases of constituent assemblies analyzed have on average a total of 195 members, with 1 representative for every 250 thousand inhabitants.

Factors to consider in the election of a Constituent Assembly in Chile

As you may know, today (Oct.25th, 2020) in Chile there is a vote to approve or reject the drafting of a new Constitution, which would replace the one created in 1980 under the Military Government of President Augusto Pinochet.

It will also be chosen between two options of bodies that can draft it, a Mixed Constitutional Convention (made up of 50% of parliamentarians and 50% of citizens elected by popular vote) and a Constitutional Convention (made up of 100% of members elected by popular vote).

The risk of the creation of a constituent assembly, similar to the one formed in countries like Venezuela, is that being a body with binding powers, it could make major changes to the laws and institutions in force based only on a circumstantial majority.

CADEM survey conducted between October 9th and 11th, 2019

Without considering that the social demands observed in the massive demonstrations of October 2019, had more to do with improving pensions, education, health, work or attacking crime, rather than making changes or drafting a new Constitution.

The call for a Constituent Assembly at a time of social tension may not be very appropriate. On the other hand, those who promote it with the greatest emphasis (Communist Party and Broad Front) belong to a sector with minimal national representation and with objectives far removed from the interest of citizens.

Until the moment of publishing this article, great interest in attending to vote has been seen in the Chilean population, we hope that the results will serve to appease the spirits of the most radical sectors and carry out the reforms that are needed and thus improve the model which has allowed us to grow in the last decades.

 

Data from the document: Mechanisms of constitutional change in the world - United Nations Development Program (UNDP)

Crisis in Chile: What has changed after a year of social protests ?

Social protests October 2019

Different experts estimated that the Chilean social outbreak was in a "pause" while the country was in quarantine, with the possibility that the protests would be reactivated if the political class did not openly condemn the episodes of violence.

  

It has been 12 months since one of the biggest political-social crises in the history of Chile began. On the political spectrum, the center-right government of Sebastián Piñera has sought to appease the demands of the citizenry with his proposals, including a reform of the Chilean pension system (the so-called AFPs, private system), to which a new Fund of Collective and Solidarity Savings would be added, of a state nature, among other novelties.

For their part, both the ruling party and the opposition continue to campaign for and against a new Constitution, which will be decided in a referendum to be held on October 25th. Despite the fact that an agreement was reached to draw up a new Magna Carta, both political sectors do not seem to have the support of the public, who are crying out for structural changes in the system.

There is no consensual diagnosis of the causes of this social outbreak, nor of its solutions.

La Moneda - Government Palace

Neither the government nor the opposition have a very clear understanding of this phenomenon. An attempt has been made to advance in this, the political world promoted a new Constitution, but the violence continued in the streets for several months before the pandemic, so it is not known if this will be solved.

On the other hand, the Government has tried to increase social spending, improve pensions, give aid bonds and that has not reassured the people either.

The president of Chile, Sebastián Piñera, as well as the Congress have a very poor approval of the citizenship according to the latest polls, mainly due to some corruption scandals, crisis of representation and a tiredness of the political parties that were one of the main reasons for this crossroads.

Although the Chilean social outbreak began with many adherents in the streets throughout the country, as the weeks went by, the protests lost intensity and this was reflected in a drop in the number of people attending the marches, as well as in the rejection of events of extreme violence.

* You might be interested in:

https://csachannel.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-riots-that-shook-chile.html

The Evolution of the Chilean Crisis (II)

No one can deny that after the events of October the constitutional protection of the Chilean economic model is seriously injured.

On October 18th, 2019, one of the strongest and most violent social outbreaks in its republican history took place in Chile. The demand for this movement was clear in its proposal -the improvement of the economic conditions of Chileans- but strongly undetermined in its solution.

The diagnosis, however, is shared. The wonderful macroeconomic results that placed Chile in a privileged position in Latin America have not, over time, relieved the weight of the cost of living of the poorest. While those with greater resources have been able to have a quality lifestyle and services close to any European country, the most dispossessed, on the contrary, fail to meet basic daily needs.

To the deep urban segregation that affects the country must be added the sustained segregation in the most important public services, such as health or education.

In educational matters -perhaps one of the most advanced sectors in the last decade- while the average educational achievement places Chile in a prominent position, that place of privilege falls when studies are made comparing the gap between the top 20% and lower income, showing a frequent mark in the Chilean reality: good average, but bad internal distribution.

The social outbreak has been the answer to all these results. From the hand of the most intense package of neoliberal reforms implemented in some country, the profound inequality that they have generated over time, has simply become intolerable.

The social movement, meanwhile, and quite similar to other European outbursts, is not articulated, denies political mediation quite intensely and does not react as expected to the measures announced. The Chilean panorama is, then, paradoxical: politicians who claim a certain primacy in the concretion of citizen demands, citizens who simply protest and a government that wants to resume normality knowing that things will never be as before.

With the passing of time, however, there was a way of giving a certain intellectual unity to citizen demands. To the questioning of the neoliberal economic model of the most extreme sectors, the rejection of all the political and legal forms that have given it protection was added. Among them, the one that gave it its most efficient and effective coverage during all this time: the 1980 Constitution.

Unfortunately, some sectors have used discontent to try to convince that the change of Constitution will be the automatic solution to all current problems.

This Constitution, created in the middle of the Military Government of Augusto Pinochet, entrusted to a group of lawyers related to the regime and approved by a plebiscite, has ruled the country for more than 30 years. That fundamental carta has been modified in countless opportunities, always with the permission of the political parties that have supported the ordoliberal agenda. They have been, therefore, reforms that have allowed us to live together, but not make structural changes in the successful economic model. When any of those changes were approved, even with the votes of the right, the Constitutional Court -one of the institutions questioned by some sectors of the left- managed to avoid it, ironically protecting the model.

The news of the opening to change the Constitution, and not only to modify it, agreed transversely by all the relevant political sectors of the country, has been received with high doses of joy, but also with some skepticism. Joy, thinking that finally a document will be written considering the needs of the people.

The negative point of this modification is that it would take at least a couple of years in its complete writing, unlike some sectors that propose to modify the existing carta to implement the necessary changes as soon as possible.

The Chilean social outbreak, on the other hand, has shown that the intensity of demand can only be satisfied with structural changes. The improvement of the current pension system -one of the clearest demands of the citizenry- must consider how it is possible to improve the current model of individual savings and move towards one that sees the old-age pension as a social right, for which it is intended to create a mixed system (individual capitalization and distribution).

The fate of the Chilean constitutional change process is still a half-told story.

In these convulsed days, one might think that neoliberalism -at least in the form disseminated by the so-called "Chicago School"- was born and could be improved in Chile.

Chile: Agreement for Peace and New Constitution

The government of Sebastian Piñera and the opposition reached an agreement for a new constitution.

It will be the first time in history that Chile has a Magna Carta born from the democratic debate, because the previous ones -that of 1833, 1925 and 1980- were preceded by a civil war, noise of sabers and a coup d'etat. It is not clear that a new Constitution manages to appease the protests, which exploded on October 18th as an expression of a good part of the citizens who feel outside the path of development of Chile in recent decades. The political class, however, is committed to deliver a solid signal to the public, which has no confidence in any of the democratic institutions, revealing a serious state crisis. "

What will the history books say about what happened in the early hours of this Friday, November 15th? First they will say the basics. That on this day 90% of the political forces signed an agreement called "For Peace and a New Constitution."

They will say that this understanding initiated a process to write a new Magna Carta for Chile, starting with a plebiscite in April 2020, where it will be voted whether or not Chileans want to replace the current Constitution, and how they want to do it.

But the historical texts will also have to add that the transversal agreement was signed just four weeks after a violent outbreak that destroyed a relevant portion of the Santiago Metro network and that included looting, vandalism, church burns, public service headquarters, and of political parties.

The new constitution will carry this "prequel" and probably that will force it with greater reason for its elaboration to reach very high levels of legitimacy. That is what the political forces that signed the agreement tried, by establishing that the new fundamental laws must be approved by 2/3 of the constituent body that is defined via plebiscite. And then the full text must be ratified by a referendum where there will be a mandatory vote.

Anyway, what will start from today is a discussion about how this new constitution should be.

On November 15th, Chile achieved a pact to change its Magna Carta. But what is the agreement really about and why is it historic?

After 28 days of massive protests -in which the citizens demanded to end with a "system of abuses" and greater equality-, the Chilean political class reached a historic agreement around one of the main demands of the protesters: the change to the Constitution.

The negotiation was not easy. Leaders of all political sectors -with the exception of the Communist Party (PC)- remained long hours in Parliament discussing and trying to agree on a formula that would leave everyone more or less satisfied.

"Tonight is historic for Chile," said Senate President Jaime Quintana. "We are responsible, indeed, for many of the injustices that Chileans have pointed out to us," he said.

Broadly speaking, the pact established the convening of a referendum in April 2020 and in which Chileans will have to answer two questions: first, whether or not they want a new Constitution; and, second, what kind of body should write it.

Although it is still difficult to predict whether or not this will calm the rage of the protesters, various public figures -and of different political sectors- have positively valued the agreement and called for "social peace."

But what is consensus really about? Why is it historical? 

1 - The most important points of the pact

The first most relevant point of the agreement is the realization of a plebiscite in April 2020 where Chileans must answer two questions:

* Do you want a new Constitution?

I approve or reject.

* What kind of body should write the new Constitution?

Constitutional mixed convention or constitutional convention.

What is the difference between both methods? While the "mixed constitutional convention" will be made up of 50% of parliamentarians in office and 50% of citizens elected for the occasion, the "constitutional convention" will consist only of citizens elected for that purpose.

With the result of the plebiscite, the election of the members that will make up any of these two instances will take place in October 2020 under universal suffrage. This will happen at the same time as the regional and municipal elections.

As a method of election, the agreement text states that "the same electoral system that governs the elections of deputies in the corresponding proportion will be used".

On the other hand, the pact of Chilean politicians points out that the term of operation of the constituent body in charge of drafting the new Fundamental Charter will be up to 9 months, extendable only once for three months.

This body must approve the voting rules and regulations of the same under a quorum of 2/3 (66.6%) of its members.

Sixty days after the delivery of the new constitutional text by this body, a ratifying referendum will be held with universal and mandatory suffrage.

Finally, the new Constitution will govern at the time of its promulgation and publication organically repealing the current Constitution (issued in 1980 during the Government of Augusto Pinochet).

Whatever the constituent body (mixed constitutional convention or constitutional convention), it must be dissolved once the task entrusted to it has been completed, that is, to write a new Fundamental Charter.

2 - Why is it historical ?

The political leaders who signed the pact considered this agreement "historic."

But how true is that statement?

The doctor of political science of the University College London (UCL), Javier Sajuria, explains to BBC Mundo that the historical character is due to the fact that "never in Chile has a Constitution been drafted by an elected body or with citizen participation."

"It has always been done by small groups, either experts or politicians, without much feedback during the process," says the academic.

On the other hand, there are those who say that it is historic due to the "breadth of the agreement", being signed from a party as conservative as the Independent Democratic Union (UDI) to members of the left-wing coalition called Frente Amplio.

Source: BBC, T13, El Libero, Author's notes