Approximate reading time: 1 minute, 56 seconds
The constitutional process in Chile continues to generate discussions and debates in a political context with signs of stagnation. The Joint Commission in charge of analyzing the observations presented by the Expert Commission has been in the center of attention due to the lack of significant progress in the deliberations. These are the latest events in the process and the conflicting positions of the main actors involved.
Stagnation in the Debate
As the Joint Commission of the constitutional process has continued its deliberations, the lack of consensus and disagreements have become evident. On its second day of work, 20 regulations corresponding to chapters I, II, III and IV were debated, as well as two transitional provisions. One of the most controversial topics under discussion was the exemption from paying taxes for the first hometo. This proposal from the Expert Commission, which sought to eliminate this exemption, was tenaciously defended by the Republican Party and Chile Vamos benches.
Councilor Pilar Cuevas, of the Republican Party, argued in favor of the exemption, claiming that this measure would benefit the “emerging middle class.” Additionally, she noted that the impact on municipal funds would be limited and that there is the possibility of submitting a bill to compensate for lost resources.
On the other hand, counselor María Pardo, from Social Convergence (CS), called to “honest positions” and explain the impact of the measure on the municipalities. This debate over tax exemption is just one of many points on which the parties involved have significant differences.
Education Financing
Another important issue in the debate concerns the financing of education. The Council proposed that the State “guarantee financing per student.” In contrast, the Expert Commission proposed replacing this phrase with “finance and coordinate a free system.” This discussion has profound implications for how the education system will be structured in the future.
Commissioner Catalina Lagos highlighted the importance of establishing a “social and democratic State of law.” However, some maintain that these constitutional norms could limit possible modifications in the educational system.
Terrorist Threat and State of Siege
The observation that proposes eliminating the phrase “the serious terrorist threat” as a reason for declaring a state of siege has also generated controversy. Commissioner Natalia González indicated that the right is considering the possibility of using the expression “terrorist act” instead. This debate reflects the importance of clearly defining the criteria for declaring a state of siege in a country that has faced security challenges.
Councilor Alejandro Kohler stressed that the conflicts in the southern macrozone of Chile involve political and historical issues, in addition to security issues. This highlights the complexity of addressing the challenges facing the nation.
Future perspectives
The Joint Commission will continue its work, reviewing and debating the observations in the pending chapters. In addition, a deadline has been established to present solution proposals. As this process progresses, the fate of the constitutional proposal remains uncertain, with voters trending towards “no” in the polls, despite the fact that the campaign in favor promoted by Republicans has barely begun on social networks.
The constitutional process in Chile continues to be fertile ground for disagreement and political confusion. The final result of this process will have an impact that is still difficult to evaluate.
