The second constitutional project was defeated by an 11-point margin at the ballot box, amid a political climate intensified by far-right movements and the enduring influence of traditional right-leaning forces. The end of 2019 left Chileans facing an almost unimaginable scenario. After years of intense political and ideological clashes between the left and various conservative factions, the 1980 Constitution—drafted under the military regime and amended roughly seventy times after Augusto Pinochet’s departure—emerged as the sole survivor of the dispute. The irony is that this heavily patched text, with origins questioned by many, is still regarded by some as preferable to the rejected reform. Here are five keys to understanding the referendum outcome:
Constitutional fatigue
The election cycle on this Sunday closes a political arc that began during the 2019 social upheaval. The push to draft a new Magna Carta served as a bargaining tool to defuse the crisis, even as anti-capitalist rhetoric surfaced in protest. The epidemic that followed accelerated the first voter decision. A joint congress produced a notably progressive draft that removed the right of veto from the opposition. The left aimed to establish a social rule of law that would render the neoliberal experiment obsolete. Yet the initiative failed to pass the public vote filter in September 2022 and had to restart from scratch. The far right’s victory allowed it to dominate the new constitutional council. The euphoria of victory led to repeated missteps: the proposed constitution could not be imposed at the ballot box. Public opinion shifted in unpredictable ways, reaching a point where opinions on the issue became highly volatile. Analysts characterized a phenomenon called “constitutional fatigue,” evident in last year’s double stumble and in the broader protest against political leadership. President Gabriel Boric acknowledged that politics remained indebted to the people of Chile and that solutions meeting their needs must be pursued.
Boric and the left have no reason to celebrate
The process that had promised hope instead delivered disappointment, said the young president, noting there was little room to profit from the election results. Over the years and after two unsuccessful campaigns, the country grew polarized. Legitimate differences were not always expressed constructively. Some campaigns employed fear or intimidation tactics, a tactic viewed as counterproductive by many. The result left the left government with a hard lesson that is unlikely to be repeated. Boric, whose approval hovered near the mid-to-low forties, said that while the result was meaningful, a large share of voters choosing the Accept option should not be underestimated. He urged not to repeat mistakes from past plebiscites. Those who won could not simply abandon or overlook those who were defeated. Despite calls for greater dialogue and consensus, signs of real progress were limited. The ruling party and the opposition were urged to abandon trench warfare and focus on pragmatic solutions to the most pressing daily concerns of Chileans, including urban security, healthcare, and the fate of natural resources such as lithium. The political fight extended beyond the ballot, with reforms like tax policy taking on a progressive tone amid ongoing tensions about growth and social welfare.
Kast’s misstep
The initiative led by José Antonio Kast and the far-right Republicans drew sharp reactions for its environmental, gender, social, and economic rights positions. Kast aimed to push a new constitution through a plebiscite and steer national politics toward his presidential ambitions for 2025. Yet the effort failed, and the campaign did little to stabilize the broader political landscape. Kast’s defeat was seen as a setback for his bid and for the idea of a sweeping constitutional change. He argued that neither the government nor the left could celebrate this outcome. Rivalry within right-wing circles intensified, with Evelyn Matthei from the Independent Democratic Union highlighting a more moderate path as a potential ideal. The loss complicated the Republican leadership’s political calculations and possibly reshaped the road to the next electoral cycle.
He lost but won
In the eyes of many Chileans, the current constitution remains preferable, not fully aligned with Kast’s goal of replacing it. The reaction across political spectrums showed a preference to retain the existing framework while accepting the need for selective reforms. The broader right and centrist factions hesitated to fully endorse a new Magna Carta, and some left-leaning voices acknowledged that the debate could be reopened in the future. Analysts noted that discussions surrounding Pinochet’s legacy would continue to surface in political discourse, with some suggesting that the text deserves reform rather than wholesale replacement. Former ministers and political observers argued that the constitution’s essential structure endured through transitional decades, with calls to reexamine content and governance rather than attribute authorship to the former dictator. The debate persisted about what changes are appropriate and who should drive them, highlighting the enduring tension between continuity and change in Chilean politics.
What about this now?
The constitutional process appears closed for now, according to Boric, though emergencies may yet demand different responses. A major newspaper reported that there is little appetite to restart discussions in the near term, framing the current moment as a cultural setback for the left that has long sought to overhaul the institutional framework of the dictatorship era. In a country where consensus is hard to reach, both government and opposition conceded to a practical compromise, at least temporarily. The right seeks a faithful implementation of its promises, while scholars warn that a change in the political majority could still influence the constitution. Some observers suggest a future peace might emerge as the nation transitions from a left-leaning congress to a far-right constituent council. Yet there remains no clear majority to push new reforms. Analysts remind that the historic reduction in the voting quorum during Pinochet’s era still shapes the rules today, leaving open the possibility that the text could be revisited if a new political majority forms. For now, the path forward remains uncertain, with discussions likely to surface again as conditions evolve and public sentiment shifts.