What happened
Failure on the stated objective. Both processes ended without an enacted replacement constitution. Voters rejected the texts through the final decision assigned to them: 61.86% voted to reject in the final preliminary 2022 tally, and 55.76% voted against the second proposal in the equivalent 2023 bulletin. Fragmented drafting and difficult bargaining may help explain the first result, but the second rejection under a different process makes a single procedural explanation inadequate.
- Servel's final preliminary 2022 tally reported 61.86% voting to reject the convention's proposal. Servel realiza balance del Plebiscito Constitucional
- The first convention combined party-less independents, a comparatively weak right-wing bloc, and decentralized public drafting. How not to write a constitution: lessons from Chile
- Servel's final preliminary 2023 bulletin reported 55.76% voting against the second proposal. Boletín final sobre resultados preliminares del Plebiscito Constitucional 2023
What might explain it
Contested
Weak coordination and limited cross-bloc bargaining may have produced a draft insufficiently aligned with a wider electorate. How not to write a constitution: lessons from Chile
Alternative explanation: Substantive opposition to provisions, campaign dynamics, distrust, and changing turnout could produce rejection even under a more coordinated process.
Plausible
Representativeness inside a convention does not automatically create a durable ratification coalition outside it. How not to write a constitution: lessons from Chile Servel realiza balance del Plebiscito Constitucional Boletín final sobre resultados preliminares del Plebiscito Constitucional 2023
Alternative explanation: A sufficiently popular substantive package might win without strong party coordination; this case does not isolate either mechanism.
Understanding the outcome
Constitution-making rules, political contingency, and negotiated consent
Procedures shape bargaining incentives, but their effects depend on the actors and political moment. How not to write a constitution: lessons from Chile
A rejected text does not reveal which alternative procedure would have secured approval. More coordination among political leaders could change bargaining without necessarily making the result more legitimate.
Questions to take into practice
- A convention's ability to produce a text and its ability to assemble a wider ratification coalition are separate achievements.
- Rejection of a proposed constitution can be an exercise of democratic participation rather than its failure.
- The people represented in drafting and the electorate deciding adoption may differ in turnout, priorities, and political alignment.
What remains uncertain
- The relative contributions of disputed provisions, campaign dynamics, trust, turnout, and drafting arrangements remain contested.
- The two rejections do not establish an ideal degree of transparency or party control in constitution-making.