Less than a month before the plebiscite for the departure of the new constitution proposal is held, this December 17, although there is a general fatigue regarding this discussion, it seems important to me to review some of the most relevant aspects that incorporates the new text.
One of those great themes is related to the environment, which has a special chapter in the proposal, where, as will be seen below, it has a vision completely subordinated to a neoliberal and extractivist development model in Chile, deepening and legitimizing thus environmental injustice.
I point this out from reading chapter XVI called “Environmental protection, sustainability and development” (1), in which the environment is totally conditioned to the economic development of the country, and therefore to a way of producing that does not not in the least interested in the general well-being of the population nor in promoting different lifestyles.
Hence, what the chapter in question does is condition any future environmental policy to strictly economic criteria, leaving out the possibility of discussing the forestry, mining, agro-export and energy model in force in Chile, leaving the so-called sacrifice zones completely unprotected. and all the territories that continue to be seen as mere sources of natural resources.
As if that were not enough, this new constitutional proposal indicates that environmental crimes and restrictions, as appears in chapter II on fundamental rights and freedoms (page 23), are determined only by what appears in the law, which leaves out regulations and other more specific legal documents, which allow detailing violations and abuses of certain extractive projects
Having said the above, those who call to vote in favor of this constitutional proposal will be able to say that this new text incorporates environmental content, unlike the current constitution, which says little or nothing about it, which is true, but the problem of The bottom line is that Nature is seen only as a means to unlimited economic growth.
In other words, talking about the environment in the new constitutional proposal means nothing, since if Nature continues to be conceived as a mere source of raw materials and for doing business, without caring in the least about sustainability and the consequences of the climate emergency in our country.
Likewise, celebrate that climate change is mentioned in the new constitutional proposal. As some point out, it is only something decorative, since it does not oblige the State to do anything about it, it is only recognizing something without giving any response to it, or generating concrete actions for the benefit of the ecosystems and affected communities.
With regard to water, the new proposal does not raise the human right to water, only access to it, as appears in chapter II on fundamental rights and freedoms (page 29), which ends up strengthening a unique water institutionality in the world, which was capable of privatizing not only management, but also water sources, generating a socio-environmentally unsustainable water market.
For this reason, proposing only access to water is, in practice, condemning thousands of Chileans to having to obtain it through tanker trucks, denying other rights, for the benefit of large companies, as has happened with the uncontrolled business. of avocado in the province of Petorca and in other territories in Chile in the north, center and south of the country.
On the other hand, no one thought, given the triumph of the rejection of 2022, that in this new constitution Nature would be subject to rights or that an idea of Good Living would be promoted, surpassing the colonial apparatus of development, but that progress would be made less in something to address the current climate emergency, which shows us the deep fanaticism of those who seek to approve something that ends up legitimizing environmental plunder.
In short, if this new constitutional proposal is approved, it will be a danger to Nature and incapable of responding to the countless number of socio-environmental conflicts that exist in the country, which need a State present and with real powers to sanction those who violate the lives of people. communities affected by extractivism.
