Sorry mate, I pretty doubt you actually know what was proposed, and why it was turned down. You know why? Their new Constitution basically would fit in EVERY single motion you have put on PROC when trying to discuss some serious topics with your whataboutism.
Just some of it (AP):
The 388-article proposed charter, besides focusing on social issues and the environment, also introduced rights to free education, health care and housing. It would have established autonomous Indigenous territories and recognized a parallel justice system in those areas, although lawmakers would decide how far-reaching that would be.
The proposed document was the first in the world to be written by a convention split equally between male and female delegates, but critics said it was too long, lacked clarity and went too far in some of its measures, which included characterising Chile as a plurinational state, establishing autonomous Indigenous territories, and prioritising the environment and gender parity.
In contrast, the current constitution is a market-friendly document that favors the private sector over the state in aspects like education, pensions and health care. It also makes no reference to the country’s Indigenous population, which makes up almost 13% of the population.
Have a nice day
PS. It was known it will be rejected before the draft was even ready, the only question was with what margin
