Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
A woman holds a sign with the phrase "Don't be afraid of change" following the constitutional referendum in Santiago de Chile.
Second time the charm for new Chilean constitution?
Chileans will try again this year to agree on a new constitution to replace the one drafted during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. A substantial share of the population has long wanted to jettison the Pinochet-era charter – though it has undergone significant changes over the years – and the issue became a rallying cry for the massive demonstrations that rocked the country in 2019. Yet the first attempt to do so failed when voters decisively rejected in last September’s referendum a new draft that was seen by many as moving the country too far to the left.
As the Congress-appointed expert committee prepares to start work on a new version on March 6, we asked Eurasia Group expert Luciano Sigalov what to expect from Chile’s second attempt to rewrite its constitution.
What are the next steps in the process?
The 24-member expert committee is tasked with producing a preliminary draft of a new constitution by June 6. The body comprises respected academics, former officials, and advisers to political parties; there are roughly an equal number of figures chosen by center-left and center-right parties. Separately, elections will be held for a new constitutional council on May 7, with compulsory voting. The council will start its work on a final draft of the new charter on June 7, using the preliminary version prepared by the expert committee. Supervising the whole process is a 14-member technical committee composed of legal specialists chosen by congress. It is charged with preserving core aspects of the country’s democratic system including a bicameral legislature and central bank independence. The process is scheduled to produce a new charter by Nov. 7. A ratification plebiscite, also featuring compulsory voting, will be held on Dec. 17.
What lessons were learned from the failure of the last one?
Quite a few, as is evident in the changes made to the constitutional process. The expert and technical committees represent new guardrails put in place to produce a more consensus-driven and rigorous document. Parts of the new constitution presented to voters in last September’s referendum seemed hastily cobbled together, as underscored by a commitment by its drafters to continue tweaking it had it won approval. In addition, articles in the new charter will require the approval of a three-fifths majority of the constitutional council, rather than the two-thirds previously. And limits will be placed on the participation of independents, who advanced radical proposals the first time around. Lastly, the drafting period this time will be shorter to try to prevent voter fatigue with the process.
Why is a new constitution so important for Chile?
Replacing the Pinochet-era constitution would be an important milestone for Chilean democracy and a big step forward in the political transition sparked by the 2019 protests. The country-wide, months-long demonstrations developed into the country’s most acute social and political crisis in years. Even though a new charter would not meet long-held demands to enhance the social safety net and provision of public services overnight, it would provide a more favorable framework to advance progressive reforms.
And what does it mean for President Gabriel Boric’s administration?
On the one hand, a new legal framework should make it easier for Boric to make his promised changes to healthcare and pension systems, which would expand the role of the state in providing these essential public services. On the other hand, it would represent an important symbolic victory for Boric, who has long been a leading advocate of the campaign to replace the Pinochet-era document. Last September’s rejection of the proposed rewrite was a damaging blow for his young administration (Boric took office last March).
So, what do you think – is the new charter likely to win approval?
A constitution that is more moderate and consensus-driven will certainly have better chances of approval. However, approval is far from guaranteed and will depend on its final shape and public sentiment as the 17 December plebiscite approaches. Chileans have shown they don’t like radical change, and growing discontent with the political class could sour people on the constitutional process. Although Chileans have long demanded a new charter, they seem to have grown tired of an effort that has lasted for more than three years.
What would be the consequences of another failed process?
A second failed attempt to rewrite the constitution during his administration would be another damaging blow for Boric. The political class would likely give up on trying to rewrite the constitution, at least for the foreseeable future, and the issue would become less of a priority for voters. That said, if the rejection is coupled with failed efforts to reform the pension system, a new round of protests could emerge.
Supporters of "I Reject" option react to early results of the referendum on a new Chilean constitution in Valparaiso, Chile.
Can Chile get from “No” to “Yes”?
Sometimes the worst defeats can be the best new beginnings.
It’s been more than a week since Chile’s ultra-progressive draft constitution suffered a landslide rejection. Two-thirds of Chileans voted against it. Turnout was the highest in 30 years. The “No” vote won across every region and major demographic. It wasn’t even close.
But as Chile’s lawmakers get to work this week to map out a do-over, could that stunning defeat actually be a good thing for Chile’s polarized democracy?
There have been many post-mortems on the draft constitution. Some Chileans were wary of its progressive promises on economic and social issues. Others were worried about its establishment of a “plurinational state” or were baffled by woolly clauses about “transverse dialogue between the diverse cosmovisions of the peoples and nations.”
Many voted it down simply because it was supported by the young, left-wing President Gabriel Boric, whose struggles with the economy and crime have cratered his approval rating after just six months in office.
But the biggest issue, according to Isabel Aninat, a policy expert and dean of the law school at Adolfo Ibáñez University in Santiago, is that neither the document nor the constituent assembly that wrote it ended up reflecting the attitudes of the average, median voter. “Chilean voters are much more moderate and much less polarized than the elites,” she says.
And those average voters still want change. A new poll by Chile’s Cadem pollster shows two-thirds of Chileans stillwant to rework or replace the existing constitution, which means there’s an opportunity to do it all over in a way that builds a stronger consensus and yields a document that can win approval.
“The people who are writing the new one are going to have to be careful,” says María Luisa Puig, an Andean region expert at Eurasia Group. “They’ll need to think ‘if I don’t pull together a product that is as consensus-building as possible, the thing is going to be rejected again,’ and then it’s end of story — you can’t be rejected twice.”
That process is what lawmakers are hashing out right now. Lower house President Raúl Soto said Monday that the country’s political parties and the president are “advancing, without rush but without pause” on the roadmap towards a second constitutional process, which could be released before the country’s Independence Day, September 18th.
Key questions surround the timing of new referenda and time limits on new drafting conventions. But the most important issue, says Aninat, is who does the writing.
The last constituent assembly was elected by a low-turnout vote during the pandemic, and it included a number of independents who in practice skewed heavily towards the left or who were seen as unserious – one leading member was outed for faking a cancer diagnosis, while another asked to vote on the document by video from his shower. These individual antics had an outsized impact on people’s perceptions of the work the assembly was doing.
The new process will need to address the participation of independents, perhaps favoring established party representatives instead. And it will almost certainly include a number of appointed experts to help guide the process.
A strong slate of candidates could help the parties rebuild some of the trust that ordinary Chileans have lost in their political system, says Aninat. In a 2021 Latinobarómetro regional study, only 22% of Chileans felt “close” to their political parties.
The defeat has given Boric an opportunity to correct course too. Grappling with a 39% approval rating, he reshuffled his cabinet last week, ousting two long-time allies from his student radical days and replacing them with figures from the country’s traditional center-left. With three and a half years left in his term, the stunning, early defeat he suffered on the constitution offers a chance to reset.
There’s no guarantee that Chile will get it right the second time around. There are still divisions in Chilean society over many issues that constitution-writers will have to grapple with – the state’s role in the economy and the environment, the rights of Indigenous communities, abortion rights, and so on.
And even among those who want to move on from the current constitution, there are splits about whether to replace it entirely, or merely to update it.
But the decisive blow of the “No” vote has provided an opportunity to reset the terms of the debate and to structure it in a way that drives towards greater consensus. In a region where radical shifts from left to right are becoming the norm, Chile has an opportunity to set a different example.
Aninat says that whereas this first constitutional process was “cathartic” – coming out of the massive social upheavals of 2019 and 2020 — “the new process can be more reflective. We have a chance to put our thoughts into the next 30 years and leave that catharsis behind.”