Global news report for July 15

Chile President, Gabriel BorekThis Friday, he said that if the “no” option wins the September 4 referendum, in which the future of the proposal for a new constitution will be decided, it will be necessary to “prolong this process for another year and a half, since it will have to be discussed again from the beginning.”

We are constantly reviewing the proposed constitution. It is legitimate to support either ‘Agree’ or ‘Reject’. What we have to ask ourselves is what will happen the next day, the president said in an interview with the TV show “Contigo in La Mania”.

“Chile clearly voted in a referendum that it wanted a new constitution, but it just didn’t vote for it. It voted that it wanted a new constitution that would be written by a body specially elected for that purpose, and therefore, if the ‘No’ alternative wins, what will happen is that we will have to prolong this process. There must be a new founding process,” the president stressed.

The massive protests in Chile from the end of 2019 to the beginning of 2020 led to the implementation of several social reforms and an agreement to seek a new constitution.

Citizens agreed in a referendum in October 2020 to convene a Constitutional Council, which was elected on May 15-16, 2021 and began meeting on July 7 of that year.

Voters handed Borek the text of the Magna Carta proposal on July 4.

The draft constitution defines Chile as “a social and democratic state of law. It includes, among other things, the participation of territorial entities and indigenous peoples and nations.

So far, it has been considered that if the “no” option wins, the current constitution written during the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet will remain, but Borek stressed on Friday that a new call should be made to elect fundamentalists who rewrite a new proposal.

“This is the path that Chile decided to follow when on October 25 it voted in a referendum on a new constitution drafted by a 100% elected body for this purpose,” Borek said.

Regarding the constitutional proposal to be presented to voters in September, Borek acknowledged that “there is no doubt that there are things to be improved. I do not applaud”, but added that “what I invite everyone to put forward and answer in good faith, is to think of which scenario is more feasible for amendments.” “.