Chile’s draft constitution is seriously flawed
The successful emerging market deserves a better bill of rights
The editorial board
People have protested against the new charter which reads more like a lengthy political manifesto than a succinct distillation of fundamental rights © Martin Bernetti/AFP/Getty ImagesChileans vote on Sunday on whether to adopt a radical new constitution.
At stake is the economic model of one of the world’s most successful emerging markets.
The omens are not good.
Over the past three decades, Chile was widely touted as an example.
Investors loved its steady growth, stable and predictable laws and technocratic government.
But the impressive economic numbers and reductions in poverty hid major flaws.
Inequality remained high and public health, education and pensions inadequate.
A class-ridden society and an economy dominated by traditional families limited opportunities for those not born into wealth.
Student protests bubbled up in 2006 and again in 2011-13.
In October 2019, public anger boiled over, with weeks of sometimes violent demonstrations.
A government promise of a new constitution to replace the current dictatorship-era document helped persuade protesters to abandon the barricades.
Chileans entrusted the drafting of a new charter to a special assembly elected in 2021.
Most citizens hoped for a document to preserve prosperity but tilt the balance towards a stronger state to improve public services and distribute wealth more fairly.
That did not happen.
Chosen on a low turnout during the pandemic, the constituent assembly was dominated by the hard left.
A large faction of “independents” turned out to be radical activists.
The body proved unrepresentative of Chilean society, which is balanced between left and right, and generally shuns extremes.
After a year of sometimes chaotic deliberation, the assembly produced its draft.
It is not brief.
The new charter runs to 388 articles and 57 transitional clauses.
It would be one of the world’s longest constitutions, yet one of its most vague.
The state, for example, would “recognise and promote intercultural, horizontal and transverse dialogue between the diverse cosmovisions of the peoples and nations”.
A long list of government responsibilities extends to developing Chile’s culinary heritage and establishing regional media.
The state would guarantee citizens’ rights to develop their personalities and life projects.
Overall, the charter reads more like a lengthy political manifesto than a succinct distillation of fundamental rights.
Worryingly for business, the document erodes property rights and would Balkanise Chile into a “plurinational, intercultural, regional and ecological” state, including autonomous territories with their own justice systems.
It replaces the senate with an emasculated “chamber of regions”, removing vital checks and balances.
Chile is the world’s biggest copper producer and its second-biggest exporter of lithium.
But the draft charter creates so much legal uncertainty that it risks deterring the big investments needed for new mines.
Alarmed by its radicalism and suffering a sharp economic downturn, Chileans have turned against the new constitution.
Polls show a slim majority rejecting it (though their reliability is unclear).
Gabriel Boric, the country’s leftwing president, is in favour but has promised amendments.
This would not address the biggest problem: that the draft lacks the broad support needed for a foundational document.
Investors have given their verdict: Chile’s currency devalued faster in the year to July than any of its regional peers, a trend exacerbated by the weak copper price.
There is broad consensus in Chile that a new constitution is needed.
This deeply flawed draft is not the solution.
Instructing Congress to appoint a fresh constitutional convention would be a better course.
That would be more likely to deliver the future prosperity and fairer society to which Chileans rightly aspire.
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario