An employee of a polling station shows a ballot paper. /
The divisions and fear spread in a citizenry that this Sunday will be able to decide whether or not to bury the last vestige of the Pinochet dictatorship
In the midst of great uncertainty, embraced by a climate of fear and fear, between I want to but I should not, confused and with many doubts in the body, Chile votes this Sunday a plebiscite in which it decides whether to approve or reject the draft of a new Magna Carta to bury the one built during the dark past of the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet between 1973 and 1990. A few days ago, the political scientist Cris Bellolio declared in these same pages that this vote a few months ago seemed to be a penalty without a goalkeeper. It was goal. It was marked by the people and it was a new defeat for the conservative right. But polls have shown that such a vote will go against the cheery predictions of “I approve” supporters. Despite the will and promises of the Government of Gabriel Boric to provide Chile with a new Constitution, today nobody knows how the history of this country will continue regardless of the result of the plebiscite.
On Friday, just two days before going to the polls, Chileans woke up to the news not only of the attempted assassination of the Vice President of Argentina, Cristina Fernández, but also of a series of serious incidents that occurred in Santiago in which produced an attack on Simón Boric, brother of President Gabriel Boric, when he tried to prevent the looting of a commercial premises. The capital had experienced a day of violence that forced the government not only to repudiate the act, but also to call for caution and calm. Probably this situation of insecurity that is being experienced and that has been increasing this year will influence a lower turnout at the polls, which on this occasion can count on the votes of those over 65 years of age who in the presidential elections could not do so due to of the pandemic.
There are different reasons to explain why Chileans today would turn their backs on the profound change in their Constitution. But none of them agree with what happened in October 2019. Three years ago they took to the streets to demonstrate, to protest against a government that was going one way and a society that was going another, it was an outburst that occurred with great enthusiasm, like a party, but also with many violent outbreaks. Chileans not only lit a match in their country, they also did it in the continent, which today lives in full swing looking for a better way to live.
The government of the then president, Sebastián Piñera, yielded to strong social pressure. He called a referendum to vote yes or no to the elaboration of a new Constitution. 78% said ‘yes’. They elected a parity constitutional convention, in which there were the same number of women as men, in which many independentists, marginalized groups and representatives of the original peoples, of the indigenous communities, were able to participate. Something new, almost exemplary. That yes, the conservative right, which in the last 30 years, dominated the country barely had a voice and a vote.
The Convention took a year to prepare the draft, but during that period there were fights, a more respectful dialogue was lacking, those who thought differently were called traitors, those who proclaimed an abortion law, feminists and those in favor of abortion were insulted. sexual diversity. But, despite the loss of prestige suffered by the convention, according to many political scientists, a good, moderate text ended up being drafted, in which the autonomy of the Central Bank is respected, the right to property is guaranteed, there is recognition of the original peoples, and seek greater equality. That yes, all the norms have to happen through the Congress to turn them into law.
“Expectation of change”
But what will happen if the ‘no’ wins? In an interview with ‘The Clinic’, Claudia Heiss, director of the Political Science program at the University of Chile, who participated in the constitutional convention, expresses her concern about the difficulties that the political process will present. “The approval gives more certainty of the institutional path that must be followed because it generates an expectation of change. Rejection will sharpen the conflict.”
Many Chileans are exhausted by this process that for three years has had them facing each other and living a situation that they probably had not experienced before the social outbreak. Patricio Guzmán, film director and director of many documentaries, including ‘My imaginary country’, based on the events that occurred in October 2019, which premiered in theaters on August 11, is convinced that “Chile today It is a volcano that cannot be extinguished. It is a story that has burst 40 years late. This Chile needs profound changes and to vote for the future.
President Boric has promised, whether the ‘yes’ wins or not, that he will fight to provide Chile with a new Constitution. He has assured that he will promote a new process if the text is rejected or reform the most controversial articles. Several sources close to the presidency have reported that the president has met privately with the presidents of the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, with the aim of establishing a broad consensus regardless of which option wins the plebiscite. In it, key regulations would be established for the creation of this new Magna Carta.