The Constitution Commission of the Chamber of Deputies approved in general the bill that seeks to reduce the quorum of constitutional reforms to 4/7.
The motion, which specifically enables an alternative to reform the current Constitution in case the Rejection triumphs in the next exit plebiscite on September 4, was approved by 11 votes in favor, 1 against and 0 abstentions.
The initiative, presented in June by DC Senators Matías Walker, Ximena Rincón and Iván Flores, and their independent counterpart-PPD, Pedro Araya, had the support of deputies Karol Cariola (PC); Jorge Alessandri (UDI); Joanna Perez (DC); Camila Flores (RN); Marcos Ilabaca (PS); Pamela Jiles (Ind); Raúl Leiva (PS); Andrew Longton (RN); Leonardo Soto (PS) and Gonzalo Winter (CS) and Catalina Pérez (RD). While Republican Luis Sanchez voted against.
In the instance, the Minister of the General Secretariat of the Presidency, Giorgio Jackson, as well as the lawyer and academic Sebastián Soto, also participated.
In fact, Jackson said that the Executive will not oppose the project and stressed that “we look favorably on the fact that there is a reduction to these quorums, which puts them in the same guarismo, even as the general rule of quorum that also establishes the draft of the new Constitution.”
However, he also assured that it is a reform that “in case of being approved very soon, it could hardly be promulgated properly, or be effective before this plebiscitary event.”
In addition, he stated that “but without prejudice to which in the event that the Option of Rejection was the option that generated a majority in the plebiscite, this would mean that quorum that would govern would be lower than the current one of 3/5 or 4/7. I imagine we all understand the same thing that we’re talking about that it’s only in that scenario that this bill would make sense.”
“Because in the other scenario the other Constitution, that of the project that emanated from the constitutional project, would begin to govern already from the month of October, so from the Executive not only we are not going to oppose the parliamentary motion, but we feel that it is a desire that for many decades had been raised and that, given probably the political context that we are living prior to the plebiscite, certain consensuses were generated that did not exist before around removing these locks,” he added.
Follow us on
