In the final part of the series, FIONUALA CREGANin Santa Cruz, Bolivia, looks ahead to Sunday's constitutional referendum
A MAN IN a gorilla suit wearing a mask of Venezuela’s president Hugo Chavez threatens to take people’s children away. A poster of two men kissing asks: “Is this the kind of Bolivia you want to live in?”
A brass band plays in the main square. The musicians in white T-shirts with a giant NO embroidered on the front are handing out flyers telling citizens that if the proposed new national constitution is approved in the referendum this Sunday, Bolivia will be transformed into a nation of “savages”.
Here in Santa Cruz, the heartland of the opposition to President Evo Morales, the response to a new constitution which would recognise Bolivia as a plurinational state is a resounding No.
The drafting of a new constitution, which would recognise the rights of the 36 different indigenous groups who make up at least 60 per cent of Bolivia’s population, has been a key demand of social movements for decades. When Morales, the nation’s first indigenous president, came to power in January 2006, one of the first steps he took was to organise nationwide elections for the formation of a constitutional assembly to draft a new constitution.
“This process was synonymous with the construction of a new state,” says Alex Contreras, a former spokesman to Morales. “A state must recognise the rights of national majorities, not just those of a small privileged minority.”
The Bolivian constitution was created 182 years ago by the descendants of the Spanish colonisers who took over once independence had been won. It has been modified slightly since then, generally behind closed doors.
The constitutional assembly elected in May 2006 was made up of members of both social movements and political parties.
Over a year and four months, the assembly worked in the city of Sucre and carried out consultations in cities, towns, villages and communities nationwide, collecting proposals from citizens about the kind of Bolivia they would like to live in.
“We wanted citizens to be protagonists in the development of a new constitution as a way of consolidating democracy and showing them that the country is theirs, that it belongs to all Bolivians,” Contreras says.
Elisabeth Salguero, a member of parliament, says the process opened up doors for sectors of society, including women, who have been largely invisible.
“Women from all kind of backgrounds – indigenous, Afro- Bolivian, urban and rural women – came together to work on ensuring their specific gender rights were included in the draft constitution,” she says.
“In many ways it is quite a feminist constitution. It includes historic demands of women’s movements worldwide, such as the recognition of domestic work as contributing to the economy, thus as work that should be remunerated, the right to equal pay and equal access to jobs, to reproductive rights and to maternity leave.
“It also recognises shared parental responsibility in family life and prohibits discrimination of any form – in this way it recognises all forms of sexual orientation. Gender-based violence – in both the private and public sector – is prohibited and human trafficking is illegal.”
Benedicta Huanca, a members of the constitutional assembly, says that the draft is based on the concept of chachawarma, a Quechua word meaning equal participation of men and women.
“The drafting of the new constitution has marked our arrival on the the political stage.”
Other major changes include the right to self-determination of indigenous groups – their right to practise their own forms of political organisation and administration.
The state’s responsibility for a number of social rights has also been included.
These are the right to universal free healthcare, to water and food, gas, electricity and education.
Regional autonomy for all nine provinces – an issue which has long been a key demand of the opposition in the four eastern provinces – is also included.
The opposition, however, has largely boycotted the process.
“The members of the opposition who take part in the constitutional assembly came determined to make the process fail,” Huanca says. They refused to participate in the passing of the final draft in Oruro in December 2007 and, after a number of violent confrontations and attempts at dialogue, it was the Bolivian parliament which finally ratified a slightly-modified draft last October.
According to Roly Aguilera, deputy governor of Santa Cruz, members of the opposition were forced to ratify the document by acts of intimidation from Morales supporters. “Hundred and thousands of indigenous people and small farmers circled the parliament and forced the parliamentarians to ratify the constitution,” Aguilera says.
“Every aspect of the draft constitution is legally flawed. For a start it is racist text, giving certain citizens rights over others.” This is a reference to a provision for quotas to increase the number of indigenous members of parliament.
The opposition is also concerned about a provision guaranteeing freedom of religion and spiritual beliefs and proclaiming the state free of religion. The constitution currently recognises Catholicism as the official state religion. Many in the Catholic Church fear that the separation of church and state will facilitate the legalisation of abortion and gay marriage.
However, despite the active No campaign spearheaded by the opposition, recent polls suggest a strong Yes vote is likely.
Huanca is also optimistic.
“The opposition have used tactics of violence and aggression to prevent the whole constitution from going ahead. On Sunday we are going to kill them with our vote. Peacefully and democratically, we are going to bury them alive by voting Yes.”
- Series concluded.