opinion piece from El Comercio

Constitution imposed
The result is a draft constitution tax, imposed on themselves and assembly imposed on the country.

By Cesar Montúfar

We offered a new policy, a country that rebirth from a civic revolution, in which the "corrupt elites" and the "partidocracia" yield to the emergence of a country other than political, renewed, pluralistic; gave us democracy, separation of powers, not offered to leave behind the rémoras of warlordism and handling; offered us change, not behaviors that violate the agreed rules; offered us a new political discourse, raising the debate, eradicate arrogance from power, we offered participation, independent monitoring bodies; We offered a constitutional debate and not the obedience of a pseudo majority raised their hands when it imposed (in AP few exceptions).

We offered a Constitution that is a life plan for the future, a common project of long-term, not a text adopted so irresponsible to rush, without respecting agreements made, changed at the last minute by presidential order, approved without debate, forged without consensus, we offered to build democracy, rebuild the homeland from a participatory process. Does that was what we offered and what we receive?

After eight months of work that began with constitutional violations and the statute itself, after thousands of words, promises, raw lyricism and demagoguery, it gives us a draft constitution imposed a text made a thousand per hour, a text mostly was not discussed in plenary, which was the place of real debate; receive, in effect, another missed opportunity, another failed attempt.

Of course, we would say that thousands of people visited the Assembly and made proposals, we will say that surveys their favour and that the President who leads both imposed and humiliates is connected by the people and has been chosen by providence for the refundar country and play practices that attacks without anyone realises-go, bare-king, we filled in demagoguery and verbiage but in the end no one can demonstrate, with a thousand or national chains, there was a real constitutional debate in the country, debate to be given in the House, I repeat, and that it should incorporate citizen positions beyond lobbying.

Perhaps we hear a great debate about the economic model; perhaps discussed the reasons for the new hyperpresidencialism; perhaps left the assembly of the MPD to defend why his centralist model of education. Do not heard anything about this, the great debate never occurred. There was trouble, was complete, was the order came from Carondelet… In the end, the result is a draft constitution tax, imposed on themselves and assembly imposed on the country; what should be the result of a general consensus was a packed of Mr Alexis Mera [presidential legal counsel] and nothing else.