[ad_1]
With great annoyance, the president of the Commission on Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples, Emilia Nuyado, reacted today to the proposal that was finally voted on this morning and that set 18 seats reserved for indigenous communities, approved by six members of the opposition and rejected by four pro-government parliamentarians.
In the opinion of the deputy, the State of Chile had the great opportunity to repay the historical debt towards the native peoples, giving her the real possibility of participation to write the Fundamental Charter. “However, here prevailed the transversal heritage of the right, the left and the center of having discriminatory, class and racist attitudes towards indigenous peoples,” said Nuyado in conversation with The counter.
“I expected a more empowered opposition to the treatment and ties it has had with indigenous peoples, unlike a government that, since the seats reserved for indigenous peoples began to be discussed, always had the refusal to incorporate them,” he criticized. the deputy.
Debate interrupted
The debate that began at 6 p.m. on Monday lasted until the wee hours of the morning and was interrupted a couple of times by the ruling party legislators who, seeing that there was no agreement, left the commission, while the senators and deputies of the opposition scolded for lost time. The anger was rising in tone, so the mixed commission was called again to vote and the result gave way to a formula, whose future is uncertain and which should be voted in the room on Thursday. Nine supernumerary seats and another nine within the 155 conventional constituents that will draft the new constitution was the formula approved by the opposition and rejected by the ruling party. In this marathon day, the recriminations between both sectors did not cease at any time, and they revealed the inability to legislate on an issue as relevant as the participation of indigenous peoples, historically excluded from the great decisions of the country.
Senator DC Francisco Huenchumilla warned that with the 15-seat formula proposed by the ruling party “the State closes the doors to native peoples and does not learn from history.”
Register and end to self-identification
The tension was very high among the members of the commission, since there was no progress on the figure, nor on whether these seats would be part of the 155 of the Constitutional Convention or would be supranumeral.
Before, yes, they voted for the creation of an indigenous registry that will be drawn up on the basis of the antecedents available in the State, such as the request for indigenous quality in Conadi; the list of indigenous surnames of the same organism; the list of indigenous surnames of applicants for indigenous scholarships since 1933; the registry of members of communities and legal indigenous associations of Conadi, among others.
However, the legislators left out the possibility of self-identification with the indigenous communities, a procedure that had been thought could occur at the time of voting, through a simple declaration of the person before the Servel.
This point is strongly questioned by the deputy Emilia Nuyado, because – she argues – “self-identification did not prevail, but a registry that will limit people who have not obtained their status as indigenous. Unfortunately, it ended up limiting the possibility of self-identification, taking it to a register that in these times will be difficult to build, because we are against time ”.
For the rest – he adds – “if someone wants to self-identify it must be 40 days before and it is not clear who is going to receive it: the Conadi, the Servel or the municipality
Nuyado regretted the vote and noted that “it is disappointing that the formula was approved by the opposition. Our parliamentarians have a great responsibility, because they approved what the right wing had told them to do, but moreover, the ruling party then has the luxury of rejecting it. I do not understand them”.
There is no clarity of what will happen when I vote in the Senate hall, and even Senator Luz Ebensperger made a reservation of constitutionality.
[ad_2]
