More than 100,000 people attended a Pride protest in Santiago, Chile, on June 25. Chileans on Sept. 4 overwhelmingly rejected a new constitution that would have enshrined LGBTQ rights. (Photo courtesy of Gonzalo Velásquez)
Chileans overwhelmingly rejected a new constitution Sept. 4 that would have enshrined LGBTQ rights in an unprecedented way.
Upwards of 80% of Chileans in October 2020 voted in favor of changing the constitution.
More than 60% of them rejected the new constitution in Sunday’s referendum. Slightly more than 38% of Chileans voted to approve it.
The need to change the current constitution, which is a legacy of Gen. Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship, arose after social unrest in 2019 that exposed long-standing standing inequalities in the South American country.
The new constitution, which a Constitutional Convention with an equal number of men and women and eight openly LGBTQ members, was drafted in one year. Gaspar Domínguez, a gay doctor, was the Constitutional Convention’s vice president.
There were several points of disagreement.
One of the constitution’s most controversial amendments called for Chile to become a plurinational state that would have recognized the existence of the different indigenous people in the country. The “rejection” groups argued the recognition of indigenous people would have created a privileged group and divided the country.
This discourse permeated the debate over the constitution.
President Gabriel Boric’s government said the referendum went well in terms of participation, public transportation and the functioning of the institutions that helped carry it out. The results were available a few minutes after the polling stations closed.
Boric addressed the country from La Moneda, Chile’s presidential palace, in a nationally broadcast speech after the results were known.
He valued the high participation and celebrated the “triumph of democracy.” At the same time, however, he said the “constituent process has not ended.”
Boric said his government will “agree as soon as possible on the terms of the new constitutional process,” alluding to the fact that the Pinochet-era constitution must be changed. Those who supported the “rejection” option have also committed themselves to find a new way to change the constitution.
Congresswoman Emilia Schneider, a Boric supporter who is the country’s the first openly transgender member of Congress, on Twitter acknowledged the “hard result” of the referendum.
“The constitution of the dictatorship does not unite us and we could not build a majority around the proposal for which we voted,” said Schneider. “The cycle of changes is not over. Citizens demand social rights and more democracy. It is urgent to give answers.”
“The constituent process does not end here. It is time for those on the side of rejection to assert their commitment,” she stressed. “From tomorrow we must work for a new democratic process, with parity, with indigenous peoples and (a) participatory (process.) Chile has spoken and we need a new constitution.”
Most LGBTQ organizations and activists in Chile urged voters to “approve” the new constitution because it would have extended explicit rights to the community for the first time. These would have included the recognition of non-heteronormative families outside of marriage, the right to gender identity and expression, nondiscrimination and reproductive rights.
Alessia Injoque, director of Fundación Iguales, an organization that works with the Human Rights Campaign, told the Washington Blade “the new constitution, if approved, would have represented a very significant advance in the protection of our families, in freedom to live authentic lives and without discrimination.”
“It is regrettable that this advance will not be consolidated, but it is time to recognize the result and work so that these rights are part of the next process,” Injoque lamented.
Injoque in response to a question about the possibility of a new constituent process to draft a new constitution said “in politics the doors are never completely closed.”
“It is difficult to think that we will have such a clear opportunity, with such a strong constitutional proposal on LGBTIQ+ rights, but we will continue working until we achieve full equality and the same freedoms,” said Injoque.
Javiera Zuñiga, the spokesperson for the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation, another LGBTQ rights group in Chile, told the Blade the draft constitution had “unprecedented positive elements” and there was “an excessive confidence that all citizens felt highly represented by the text.”
“Certainly in what follows in the constitutional process, it will be fundamental to achieve greater consensus on the matters that did not convince Chileans on this occasion,” said Zuñiga.
“The matters related to substantive equality that were included in the proposal are not part of the conflictive elements in the proposal, such as nondiscrimination, respect for identity and equality of rights are quite well installed among Chileans as basic principles of the society we wish to build,” added Zuñiga. “I believe that this has been one of the greatest gains of the process.”
Zuñiga said Movilh “will continue to contribute to (the constituent process and) nurture it and achieve for the community nothing less than what this proposal considered.”
