Chile’s Constitutional Reform: A Divided Nation Says “No” Again

Chile remains trapped in a cycle of constitutional uncertainty. Following the overwhelming rejection of the first draft in 2022, the December 2024 referendum saw the public once again oppose a proposed constitution. This time, the draft was shaped by conservative forces, sparking debates about its relevance and ambition.

The Proposal

The new draft sought to replace the Pinochet-era constitution, which many view as a relic of authoritarianism. However, it faced criticism for being uninspired and overly conservative, focusing on "stability" rather than progress. Key areas of contention included the lack of robust environmental protections and the rollback of rights for indigenous peoples.

1. Environmental Neglect

Despite Chile's unique biodiversity and vulnerability to climate change, the proposed text failed to prioritize environmental preservation. Activists and environmentalists labeled it a missed opportunity, especially given the global urgency of ecological crises.

2. Indigenous Rights

Indigenous groups, particularly the Mapuche, were disappointed by the reduction of rights compared to the first draft. The idea of plurinationalism—a recognition of the country's multicultural identity—was removed entirely, signaling a retreat from inclusivity.

3. Political Polarization

The drafting process, dominated by conservative parties like the Republican Party, alienated progressive voices. Many voters saw the proposal as ideologically driven rather than a unifying document, deepening divisions instead of healing them.

Political Fallout

For President Gabriel Boric, a staunch advocate for constitutional reform, the rejection is a political blow. His administration’s inability to deliver a new constitution raises questions about its capacity to fulfill campaign promises. Meanwhile, the conservatives’ attempt to control the narrative backfired, as public sentiment turned against their approach. Polls now suggest that Chileans favor a "constitutional break," effectively halting reforms for the foreseeable future.

Broader Implications  

Chile's experience illustrates the challenges of constitutional reform in polarized societies. Without widespread consensus, such efforts risk becoming battlegrounds for ideological disputes rather than vehicles for societal progress. For Chile, the question remains: can a nation heal its wounds without the foundational change it so desperately seeks?

Conclusion  

Chile’s journey toward constitutional reform remains unfinished. While the latest rejection reflects public dissatisfaction, it also underscores the need for a more inclusive and forward-thinking process. For now, the country must navigate its future with an outdated constitution that continues to divide its people.