Protests and Riots continue in Chile

[kaoras]

Well, I thought a new topic was needed for an update.

• Protests (and violence) haven't really slowed down in the last week, they are not as big as in the first week but they have stabilized.
• Repression continues to be brutal, and there has been a lot of outrage about the number of people with eye wounds due to being shot in the eye with pellet guns by the police. The Medical college claimed that the number of people with severe eye wounds (180)in the last two weeks is bigger than any other conflict in the world. (Including a 6 year period of Israel-Palestine conflict). This data is from a week ago, the number should be higher now. NYT did a video about this: https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/americas/100000006795557/chile-protesters-shot-eye.html. 
• To celebrate this, Piñera announced new anti-lootings, anti-barricades, and anti-hood laws as part of a security agenda, which did wonders calming everybody down... Carabineros has said that now they will only use it when they fear for their lives, though that is what is supposed to happen now anyway, and I haven't seen them any less trigger happy than before.
• Piñera also said that they had received info about foreign intervention in the protest and that they passed the info to the Public Ministry. Despite this, the national prosecutor said afterward that they hadn't received any info about foreign intervention...
• A U.S. inmigrant and white supremacist John Cobin shot at protesters that were blocking a road in the beach resort of Reñaca. One person was wounded in the leg and John Cobin was arrested.
• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

Today a general strike was called. Usually in Chile general strikes are observed by no one but public employees but protesters have cut roads in many big cities (even throwing rocks at public transport) so there's going to be significant disruption.

[kaoras]

Piñera talked today after a day of violent unrest. He basically said nothing, calling for accords for "Peace, Justice and a New Constitution" without giving any details.

The only thing of notice is that he is calling retired Carabineros to help and that he is going to apply the  State Security law to anyone who "incites violence". No auto critic at all and praised Carabineros for its work despite the widespread outcry against the brutal repression.

[Antonio the Sixth]

• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

....................

well ok then

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

....................

well ok then

I’ve seen people claim it means Congress will select the constituent assembly from among its members.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

....................

well ok then

I’ve seen people claim it means Congress will select the constituent assembly from among its members.

Is that, itself, constitutional?

[kaoras]

• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

....................

well ok then

I’ve seen people claim it means Congress will select the constituent assembly from among its members.

Nobody knows, not even the government. They say that they are still reviewing the mechanism. All opposition parties have rejected this "approach" and have demanded a Constituent Assembly.

Other news, a recording from the director of Carabineros was leaked. He said that he wasn't going to punish anyone because of the repression, "even if they force me". The police confirmed the veracity of the recording but said that it was referring to "due process" in the cases of "possible excess".

A court has admitted a lawsuit against Piñera for his responsibility in crimes against humanity committed by the state in the repression of the protest. There will be an exclusive prosecutor. This is honestly less spectacular than it sounds because it is unlikely that they will find legal responsibility, but it shows that there is merit to the claims of political responsibility for the murder and torture committed by armed and security forces since the start of the protests.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

....................

well ok then

I’ve seen people claim it means Congress will select the constituent assembly from among its members.

Is that, itself, constitutional?

I don’t know. I’ve never heard of this before and neither, it seems, has anyone else.

[Lumine]

Quite an exciting night at the moment.

For the past couple of days - in the aftermath of the presidential call for an accord* - most political parties and coalitions have been negotiating an agreement regarding a new Constitution and the necessary mechanisms to achieve one. Reforming the Constitution to allow for the process to create a new one - which is the sole legal, institutional road - requires 2/3rds of Congress, and thus far Chile Vamos (government), most of the former Nueva Mayoria (DC, PPD, PRSD and PS) and the Frente Amplio (or most of it, it would seem at least RD is on board) has apparently made a lot of progress in securing that agreement, although no deal has been closed yet (a few matters are still being debated).

It is rumored the agreement will involve a formal referendum between a Constituent Assembly (may not be called that, would mean 100% of elected delegates) and a Constituent Convention (probably half elected delegates, half current members of Congress, who might be subsequently barred from immediate reelection), the winning mechanism being subject to certain rules to guarantee a more consensual document (not a simple majority quorum, possibly 3/5 or 2/3). One would expect the Constituent Assembly - or Citizens Assembly, a potential name - would win such a referendum, but that's speculation right now. It would be followed by an election for delegates to the constituent process.

That an agreement would be even possible seemed almost impossible a few days ago, so it is a welcome development and if successful might - might - provide the country with a way out of the crisis. Thus far the only ones who have declined to take part have been the Communist Party and some of their allies (Ominami's PRO, and the regionalist FREVS, which while disappointing (they haven't exactly been responsible during the entire crisis) is certainly survivable.

Don't want to get my hopes up since the accord may collapse or may not stop the violence (which would be disastrous), but hopefully this could work.
_____________________________________________________________________________

*Which I'd agree was dull and shockingly scarce in details, but it seems at least it helped, particularly since the alternative was the crisis becoming even worse (which may yet happen) and another state of emergency, with predictably disastrous results for everybody.

[kaoras]

It's seems that the main stumbling block is UDI (to the shock of no one). Also, apparently the government has had no role in the negotiations and Piñera went to his house at 9pm.

A socialist senator said that "Pinochet's Constitution has its days numbered" so we might see an accord soon

[Lumine]

It took several additional hours and it's very late into the night, but an accord has been reached between Chile Vamos (RN, UDI and Evopoli), the former Nueva Mayoria parties (PS, PPD, PRSD, DC) and the Frente Amplio (RD, Comunes, PL) and formally announced, setting a path to move towards a new Constitution:

1. There will be a binding plebiscite in April 2020, asking two questions:

A.- Do you want a new Constitution?
B.- Which body should draft a new Constitution? Options: Constitutional Convention (the equivalent to the Constituent Assembly, 100% elected) or Mixed Constitutional Convention (50% elected delegates, 50% current members of Congress).

2. There will be elections (assuming people vote for a new Constitution, which is virtually certain) for delegates in October 2020, under a proportional system (the one we use for parliamentary elections).

3. The sole duty of the constituent body will be to draft a new Constitution, and it will dissolve itself after that is done.

4. The constituent body will work with a 2/3 quorum. It will session for 9 months (can be extended to 3 months once), and the new Constitution will go to a referendum with compulsory voting (likely to be at the end of 2021).

5. Current officeholders will have to resign if they stand for election to the constituent body, and will be barred from standing for an election for a year after the constituent body dissolves itself.

6. There will be a commission (with equal numbers for government and opposition) to determine outstanding issues. All the signatory parties commit to voting for the Constitutional Amendment that will be sent to Congress to allow for this entire process to take place.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

• The most significant development was that the government has ceded to the demand for a new Constitution. They said that this will be done by a "Constituent Congress", which absolutely nobody had any idea of what that meant. Fortunately, a day after the government clarified that they also didn't know what it means, only that it was not a "Constituent Assembly".

....................

well ok then

I’ve seen people claim it means Congress will select the constituent assembly from among its members.

Is that, itself, constitutional?

To finally answer this question, no, but the parties that signed the agreement (all of them except the Communists) have all agreed to pass express the amendment(s) necessary to enact it.

[dead0man]

Isn't Chili one of the few success stories in Latin America?  Way less income inequality than the region's average, huge increases in wealth among the lowest (up 439% in the bottom 10% of earners since 1990), the highest ranking Latin America country on the UN's Human Development Index and the most "free" country in South America.

[Lechasseur]

I'm not particularly familiiar with Chilean politics, why is the current constitution unpopular?

[PSOL]

Isn't Chili one of the few success stories in Latin America?  Way less income inequality than the region's average, huge increases in wealth among the lowest (up 439% in the bottom 10% of earners since 1990), the highest ranking Latin America country on the UN's Human Development Index and the most "free" country in South America.

Yes, once the social democratic Broad Front took power after the return of democracy, they implemented policies that actually invested into the people instead of hoarding the country’s wealth into the hands of oligarchs. Now that they’re out of power, well, the right-wing coalition is fully serving their core supporters now.

[PSOL]

Former Minister of the Interior censured by the Chilean parliament

Huh, I didn’t know he was cousins with Piñera.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'm not particularly familiiar with Chilean politics, why is the current constitution unpopular?

It's still the constitution that was imposed in 1981 under Pinochet.

[Lumine]

I'm not particularly familiiar with Chilean politics, why is the current constitution unpopular?

It's still the constitution that was imposed in 1981 under Pinochet.

The main criticism levelled by many would indeed be the origins of the Constitution, but also it's content and the mechanisms for change.

It was approved in a referendum in 1980, but the results were so questionable as to look positively fraudulent. No electoral roll, the opposition was virtually not allowed to campaign (and could do so only in the radio, not on TV), there were widespread reports of government personnel voting several times, and the margin itself (67% in favor) was deeply suspicious, even if it was generally believed Pinochet was reasonably popular at that point and might - emphasis in "might", don't think there was ever reliable polling on it - have actually beaten an opposition candidate in a free election.

Then the Constitution itself was rather authoritarian and at best allowed for an eventual "protected democracy" under the careful vigilance of the Armed Forces, and it was also purposedly designed to A. install a specific electoral system which ensured overrepresentation of the right in Congress and B. established quorums for constitutional change which were high enough to make it impossible for the opposition to gather enough votes to drastically amend the Constitution.

The Constitution was reformed in 1989 after the referendum in which Pinochet lost, the government and the opposition negotiating several reforms to remove the most overtly authoritarian parts of the Constitution (approved in a referendum with 91%). Then in 2005 President Lagos (PS) reached another accord with the opposition and made further substantial constitutional reforms, removing the designated senators and other articles judged to be too undemocratic, and it was generally said by the center-left (at the time) that the Constitution could finally be judged as democratic, a "Constitution of 2005".

At this point the Constitution has been heavily amended so as to be a very different document to what it was on 1980', but from the point of view of those who dislike the Constitution it A. enshrines principles they do not agree with (Examples: subsidiarity, privatization of some resources, etc.) and B. continues to have high quorums to enact profound Constitutional change, and C. is judged to be illegitimate given the circumstances of the 1980 referendum and since now former President Lagos has lost moral authority to a degree in which his signature on the Constitution is effectively (and understandably) meaningless to most people.

Generaly speaking, meaningful constitutional reform (or a new constitution) was overdue and probably should have taken place earlier, but it is regrettable it has to happen like this. One can only hope we will end up with a document that does reflect a responsible national consensus, but there are those who sort of want the Constitution done via binding local assemblies, which would be an utter disaster.