the reasons for the ‘No’ and the constituent alternatives

It was a historic plebiscite. Nearly 15 million Chileans were summoned to vote to decide whether or not they accepted the text of a new Constitution. The ‘Rejection’ option prevailed with more than 61% of the votes. While the ‘Approve’ was left with just over 38%.

The difference between the two alternatives was the big surprise of the night. The latest polls, published several weeks ago due to the electoral silence that prevailed in Chile, gave the ‘Rejection’ option as the winner. And they were not wrong, but they were not able to predict that he would do so by a large majority.

After the results were announced, the country’s president, Gabriel Boric, who had been a champion of the new Magna Carta during his political campaign, called for dialogue and assured that the path to a new Constitution that would replace the one adopted in 1980 during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet it was still open.

“This September 4, Chilean democracy comes out more robust, as the whole world has seen and recognized. A country in which, in its most difficult moments, it opts for dialogue and agreements to overcome its fractures and pain”, the president stated.

Boric added: “The second message from the Chilean people is that they were not satisfied with the Constitution proposal that the convention presented to Chile and therefore they have decided to clearly reject it at the polls.”

Now, according to analysts, Chile will have to face several challenges: recognize what the errors of the previous project were, open a process of dialogue and move towards a more inclusive constituent process.

The landslide triumph of ‘Rejection’: fake news, compulsory voting and an effective campaign

In 2020, Chileans accepted the drafting of a new Constitution with about 78% of the votes of a first plebiscite. However, the road to this Sunday was long and was marked by misinformation, scandals and divided positions on the final text reached by the Constitutional Convention.

According to Pablo Beytía, sociologist and founder of the Monitor Social platform, the triumph of ‘Rejection’ can be explained in large part because its campaign began much earlier than that of ‘Approve’.

“It already started with the beginning of the generation of the constitutional proposal. Instead, the ‘Approve’ campaign started much later, like in July. So they were already at a disadvantage, ”he assures France 24.

On the other hand, analysts point out that the ‘Rejection’ campaign was characterized by ‘fake news’ and by content that ridiculed a good part of the proposals contained in the text. Social networks played a key role in the decision of a good part of society to deny the text of the new Magna Carta.

For José Domingo Sagüés, political analyst, many of the proposals contemplated in the text “generated a lot of tension and disagreements, as was the case with the fact that the State was multinational.” In addition, several of them were not specific, such as “what the end of the Senate and the entry into force of the Chamber of Regions would imply, or that the same text had stipulated the period established for pregnant people to be able to exercise their right to voluntary interruption of pregnancy”, Sagüés affirms for France 24.

And he adds: “That lack of certainty was fertile ground for a disinformation campaign promoted by certain sectors of the ‘Rejection’.”

In addition, this plebiscite had a peculiarity: the compulsory vote. Beytía believes that this was one of the main differentiating points between Sunday’s vote and that of several years ago.

“The first vote to approve the process was in a period of pandemic and with a voluntary vote, so that means that the older population was less likely to vote and did not want to risk it (…) The situation now was completely different, then, with compulsory voting, the electoral roll probably changed a lot and that was felt. I think that changed the balance a lot,” she concludes.

02:45

Failures within the Constitutional Convention: lack of dialogue, personalities and exclusions

155 constituents made up the Constitutional Convention that drafted the rejected text. All of them were chosen by the Chileans, in a vote in which the independent candidates prevailed. At the same time, the ranks of the left and the center left did so.

Thus, many criticized the composition of the Convention and spoke of a certain ideology. Added to this was the lack of dialogue between the different sectors.

According to Germán Campos-Herrera, an associate researcher at the Social Sciences Research Institute (ICSO) of the Diego Portales University in Chile, for France 24, “although the left and the independents were the winners of the constitutional convention, those who won more seats , not incorporating the right in each and every one of the negotiations also began to reduce support in the process”.

Some divisions within the Convention that many times ended in friction, accusations and scandals. “They began to subtract neutrality from a process that Chilean men and women were eagerly awaiting. A feeling began to develop that the process was not as transparent as promised”, says Campos-Herrera.

For her part, Beytía also believes that the lack of dialogue cost the new text dearly and points out that one of the great winners of this vote were the parties.

“Political parties are institutions that are organized to negotiate and reach agreements, to some extent,” he says. And he adds that “clear organizations and clear hierarchies were lacking to be able to reach agreements.”

What are the possible scenarios after the triumph of the ‘Rejection’?

The constitutional process in Chile has not finished. Experts point out that it is very likely that a new attempt to adopt another Magna Carta will begin. However, this should have several differences.

For Beytía, the safest thing is that it includes several expert figures and that it generates more inclusion of political parties. Two key points to direct the process and that are far from the last Convention that had a large presence of independent voices.

While Sagüés adds that Boric will play a decisive role: “The path must be proposed by the President of the Republic, having reached agreements with the different political forces in the country, and the parties will have an important task to define the roadmap that will allow give continuity to the constituent process.

For Campos-Herrera, the role of the parties contemplates the representatives of all ideologies. For example, he assures, “some actors from the right and the center right, who benefited from this defeat, have agreed that they should meet to develop a new proposal that is even more concrete. The right committed itself, as a political bloc, to present a proposal that would represent not only that political sector but also a vast part of the Chilean population.”

01:32

The expectation was also opened as to whether the proposals contemplated in the rejected constitutional project would be totally marginalized or if, on the contrary, they would have a place in a new proposal.

According to Beytía, although it is difficult for this text to be taken as a reference, many of the points discussed during its drafting could continue to be discussed in a new initiative.

Sagüés assures the same: “it is to be hoped that certain rights established in the constitutional proposal (and that many of them were approved by large majorities), will be contemplated in the next Magna Carta proposal, as is the case with article 57, which states that ‘Everyone has the human right to sufficient, healthy, acceptable, affordable and accessible water and sanitation. It is the duty of the State to guarantee for current and future generations’”.

However, there seems to be a coincidence that the new process and text will have a more moderate character and that they should be more inclusive of political spectrum.

Boric and his reformist proposal are weakened

One of the main flags of the campaign of the Chilean president, Gabriel Boric, was the promulgation of a new Constitution. Thus, as Beytía indicates, the president was one of the main losers of the night.

“Several surveys highlighted that the approval of the Government had to do with the approval of the Constitution. While the Government was doing poorly and the disapproval of the Boric administration increased, the ‘Rejection’ also advanced,” he assures.

This could also weaken several of the main points of the president’s reform agenda. A tax reform is coming, as well as a pension reform, both of which could be affected by the failure of the ‘Approval’. The ruling party has already been strongly criticized and signaled the defeat of the new text.

Now Boric has big challenges. “He has the opportunity to establish himself as the articulator of great agreements to carry out a new constitutional process,” says Sagüés.

A defeat that opens new paths for dialogue in Chile, where Boric has the path open to play the role of great mediator.