The rules of “democratic” functioning that the current Pinochetista constitution illegitimately imposed, left the citizen reduced for decades to a mere entity that suffers, without having a greater participation in the political, social and economic development of the Nation. This stage ended with the social outbreak.

Already former president Eduardo Frei Montalva, assassinated by the dictatorship, publicly warned on 27 August 1980 of the harmful effects of the current constitution, today his political heirs only fulfilled their ethical duty not to tarnish his sacrifice and his ideals by defining themselves by approving it.

On the other hand, today Ricardo Lagos presents himself as the great reformer of the constitution of the 80s when in reality, he governed with that constitution and his reforms were insufficient, and his legacy of a government that was disastrous for the majorities, only had the applause of big business, and today he is once again useful to them, degrading the process and confusing with his position of indefinition.

In this context it is important to bear in mind that the constituent process arose from a plebiscite that was approved by 78% of the voters and then, in an unprecedented process, the citizens elected their representatives to draft a new Magna Carta, for the first time in Chilean history, and with a parity composition never seen in any constitutional drafting process in the world.

The constituents carried out their work in 9 months, afterwards the administrative framework was established in 3 months.

The challenge of bringing together the different representations and their legitimate different looks was a great task, in a scenario of widely diverse people, as is our society.

In this sense, citizens must understand that progress towards a country with dignity is an ongoing process, and that each milestone marks an opportunity to take another step forward; today the coherent option on this path is to vote “yes” in the exit plebiscite.

If some start from “approve to reform the new constitution” this is legitimate, since the new constitution explicitly considers it, saying that to modify constitutional norms a quorum of 4/7 is needed and a call for a ratifying plebiscite, and this is a great possibility to give dynamism to democracy.

In addition, this new magna carta contemplates popular initiative of norm, so the constant change and the incorporation of new demands and realities that emerge, are the spirit and part of its essence, recognising citizens as an active part of the decisions that affect us all, advancing in a participatory way in the progressive realisation of multiple human, social, economic and environmental rights.

Elizabeth Bravo, Sylvia Hidalgo, Karla San Martín and Alonso Trujillo