Referendums: reflections on their role in Chile’s unique constitutional journey

Chile’s constitutional journey provides a unique lens through which to examine the role of referendums in both democratic and authoritarian contexts. This article traces the historical use of referendums, from their manipulation under Pinochet’s dictatorship to their application in recent democratic efforts to replace the 1980 authoritarian Constitution. Focusing on the 2020–2022 and 2023 constituent processes, it analyzes three referendums intended to legitimize constitutional change but resulting in the rejection of two contrasting proposals. The study reveals that these referendums, while designed to enhance democratic legitimacy, failed to achieve this goal, instead exposing the depth of Chile’s crisis of representation. Public disillusionment, media polarization, and the rise of populist actors distorted the referendums’ purpose, transforming constitutional debates and campaigns into platforms for routine political contestation. The Chilean case shows that communicating the scope and possible interpretations of the constitutional text is particularly complex in a campaign marked by a general atmosphere of distrust. Even more challenging is confronting informational disorder, especially when individuals in positions of authority participate in spreading misinformation. The use of constitutional referendums in Chile not only highlights their potential as democratic tools but also underscores their limitations, emphasizing the need for careful design and broader attention to the political and social context to ensure they serve democratic ends.