Chilean President Gabriel Boric, who has become a staunch supporter of the new constitution while conceding that it needs to be resolved. EFE
Two years ago, 78% of Chileans voted in favor of a new Constitution to replace the current one that governed the country from the military dictatorship that lasted from 1973 to 1990.
However, the new text drawn up later by a Constituent Convention, with a majority of conventionalists who identified themselves as leftists, contains a series of controversial articles that _ according to various previous investigations_ would lead the Chileans to refuse the new Magna Carta in the Sunday plebiscite, whose participation is mandatory.
Among the most controversial points is the granting of unprecedented rights to the indigenous peoples of the South American nation, who represent 12.8% of the 19 million Chileans and who they are not mentioned in the current statute.
If the “Pushback” were imposed, the Constitution bequeathed by the military dictatorship would remain in force, even if the opposition and the ruling party of Social Democratic President Gabriel Boric agreed that the constitutional process will continue.I’m trying to make another card.
Here is a look at the most controversial points of the proposed new Constitution
Indigenous peoples and multi-nationalities
The draft of the new constitutional text establishes that Chile is a Multinational and intercultural state and recognizes the existence of the 11 native Chilean peoples within the framework of a country whose territory is unique and indivisible.
It specifies that the State must promote and guarantee the exercise of the self-determination of indigenous peoples, respect their collective rights and, at the level of public functions, must promote mechanisms that favor the recognition of ethnic diversity. Also, they must protect their rights to autonomy and heritage, grant recognition of their lands and resources.
It also establishes the creation of territorial autonomies, whose geographical limits and powers would be established by a law passed by Congress, if the “Approval” were to win.
All of this has generated criticism from many who see try to divide the country.
Senator Javier Macaya, chairman of the Conservative Party of the Independent Democratic Union (UDI), believes that, as it stands, it would imply the establishment “more nations within the country; we believe in national unity”.
For the constitutionalist of the Universidad de Los Andes, Jaime Arancibia, the rejection of these sections shows that some Chileans want to maintain a vision of a “unitary” state that has been built over more than two centuries of independence.
The indigenous peoples of Chile have been saying this for decades their vast territories were taken from them in the nineteenth century and some radical groups used violence as a tool to make their claims.
The new Constitution establishes the restitution of land, although it does not specify in which cases. It only indicates that an Indigenous Territorial Commission will be created which will prepare proposals between the state and indigenous peoples for delimit, repair and restore land.
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND JUSTICE
The proposal also recognizes the judicial systems of indigenous peoples, which “coexist coordinated on an equal footing” with the national system, whose judicial work will be exercised by its authorities.
The text does not specify what the powers will be, nor what kind of crimes their judicial systems will pursue. The definitions must be established by a law to be drawn up by Congress after the plebiscite and if the new Magna Carta is approved.
Indigenous Chileans do not have the courts that the national system has and tend to resolve conflicts through dialogue.
The constitutionalist and academic of the Diego Portales University, Jorge Correa Sutil, sees a problem: that indigenous peoples do not have a legal system embodied in the texts. He added that this would imply that Those who are subject to such justice will not know what rules will apply to them.
There is consensus, however, that any option wins, “Approve” or “Reject”, the ruling party and the opposition would introduce reforms or to the new Magna Carta or to the one bequeathed by the past military dictatorship, if the new text is rejected.
The ruling party has promised in that line reform the articles on territorial autonomy to indicate that they “will be consistent” with the indivisible character of the country; the reference to indigenous justice systems to specify that they will apply only to their inhabitants.
They will also clarify that issues of a national nature and constitutional reforms will be excluded from preliminary consultations with indigenous peoples on issues that may affect them.
Among the promises of change of the opposition is the change of the current unitary state into a social state of law; promote access to and adequate exercise of social rights in education, health, pensions and housing; decentralize the country and constitutionally recognize the original peoples.
They also agree that they will have to clarify several articles, including the one on indigenous justice systems, to stipulate that they will only be able to act in their own communities and that they will not be able to prosecute non-indigenous people.
CHANGES IN THE JUDICIAL SECTOR
If the new Constitution is approved, the model of the single Judicial Power will cease to exist and it will be transformed into a Justice System, integrated by the National System and indigenous legal systems.
Create a Pluri-national and equal council of justice, who will appoint all judges and officials, will review the management of all courts and may sanction or remove them if necessary. The sanctioning function is currently exercised by the Court of Cassation and by the 17 Courts of Appeal.
Judges will be a minority in the Council, because of its 17 members, eight will be judges, two civil servants, two indigenous and the remaining five will be appointed by Congress.
Academician Correa Sutil believes that the Council of Justice is an external body and the fact that it is vested with sanctioning powers, what it does is “aggravate the problem of the impartiality and independence of the judiciary”.
Regarding the composition of the Council, without the majority of judges, the former Minister of Justice Luis Bate points out that “It affects the independence of judges”. The constitutionalist Arancibia added that its composition “will favor its partisan political control”, alluding to the members that Congress will designate.
When courts rule on a case involving indigenous peoples, they must do so adopt a multicultural perspective, taking into account the customs, traditions, protocols and regulatory systems of the respective indigenous peoples.
However, the supreme court will continue to exist without its current power to govern the judiciary. I mean very weak.
OTHER PROPOSED RULES THAT GENERATE REFUSAL
Another article opposed by the opposition and by sectors of the center-left is the one that alludes to abortion, without naming it. The law establishes the sexual and reproductive rights of people, including those of decide freely on your own body and on “reproduction”.
Faced with the criticisms of some conventionalists who drafted the text why it has not been specified up to which month the pregnancy could be terminated, the plenary session added a clause that says that “the law will govern the exercise of these rights”, leaving the responsibility in the hands of Congress.
In Chile there is the right to abort for three reasons: due to non-viability of the fetus, danger to the life of the mother or in the event of rape.
A controversial issue is elimination of the state of emergency contemplated by the current Constitution and this implies the use of the armed forces to deal with situations of serious disturbance of public order.
Most of the conventional left rejected the use of the military allowed by this transitional regime, so they eliminated it.
Boric was one of the people who opposed the state of emergency, until a series of arson and gun attacks in two southern regions forced him to decree it in mid-May, while limiting the role of the military to patrolling the streets. main.
The latter has ensured that the armed forces cannot restrict the rights of assembly and mobilization.
Even the new Constitution eliminate the Senate, which will become a sort of regional assembly, an alternative that has been questioned by Senator Isabel Allende, daughter of former socialist president Salvador Allende.
you knowSantiago. AP and Clarin Agency
Source: Clarin
