Plurinational Constituent Assembly

Plurinational Constituent Assembly
Name	Plurinational Constituent Assembly
Established	Various
Jurisdiction	National
Headquarters	Various
Type	Constituent body

Plurinational Constituent Assembly is an institutional form used to draft, revise, or replace constitutions with explicit recognition of multiple nations, peoples, or ethnic groups within a single state. It emerged in contexts where movements led by indigenous organizations, regional parties, or post-conflict coalitions sought formal redesign of state structures, territorial arrangements, and rights regimes through participatory constitution-making. The model has been adopted, adapted, and contested in diverse cases across Latin America, Africa, and Asia, intersecting with demands articulated by indigenous federations, social movements, and international organizations.

Background and Concept

The concept draws on debates in comparative constitutionalism, indigenous rights, and self-determination advanced by figures and institutions such as Frantz Fanon, Antonio Gramsci, United Nations, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Organization of American States, and International Labour Organization's Convention 169. It builds on precedents like the constituent processes associated with the French Revolution, the Cuban Revolution, and the South African Constitutional Assembly while integrating recognition of plural polities akin to arrangements in Belgium, Canada, and New Zealand. Proponents connect the idea to scholarship by Charles Taylor, Will Kymlicka, Boaventura de Sousa Santos, and rights jurisprudence from tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

Historical Examples and National Implementations

Notable implementations include the 2006–2009 process in Bolivia that produced the 2009 Constitution following mobilization by the Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS), Confederación de Pueblos Indígenas, and leaders like Evo Morales; the deliberations in Ecuador during the 2007–2008 Constituent Assembly convened under Rafael Correa with participation from organizations such as the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE); and debates in Nepal after the People's Movement II and the Comprehensive Peace Accord that involved the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the Nepali Congress. Other episodes with plurinational framing occurred in constitutional negotiations linked to Colombia's peace process with the FARC, debates in Chile following the 2019 protests and the National Plebiscite, and proposals raised in contexts like Spain's Basque and Catalan questions involving parties such as EH Bildu and Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC). Comparative studies have examined links to processes in South Africa, Kenya, Iraq, and Bolivia's neighbors including Peru and Argentina.

Legal Framework and Powers

Authorities assigned to plurinational assemblies vary from advisory commissions to sovereign constituent bodies empowered under instruments like an enabling law, a referendum mandate, or transitional constitutions promulgated by actors such as the Constitutional Court or national legislatures. Typical powers include drafting constitutional texts, redefining territorial autonomy, delineating resource regimes with entities like YPFB, shaping rights for indigenous collectives pursuant to ILO Convention 169 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and establishing new institutions such as constitutional courts modeled on the Constitutional Tribunal of Bolivia or ombudsman offices comparable to those in Norway and Finland. The scope of amendment rules often references procedures in codes like the Spanish Constitution and international jurisprudence from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Composition and Representation

Composition strategies range from proportional elections overseen by bodies like the Electoral Court or National Electoral Council to reserved seats for indigenous federations, regional delegations, gender quotas influenced by examples from Rwanda and Sweden, and representation of parties such as MAS-IPSP or coalitions like the Broad Front (Frente Amplio). Some models incorporate mechanisms for minority vetoes, consensus chambers akin to the Swiss Federal Assembly's cantonal balance, and participation by civil society organizations including trade unions like the Central Obrera Boliviana and peasant federations such as the Landless Workers' Movement (MST). Debates over inclusion frequently invoke constitutional scholars from institutions like Harvard University, University of Oxford, and Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Deliberative Processes and Decision-Making

Procedural design options include consensus decision-making practiced in indigenous assemblies such as those of the Aymara and Quechua, qualified majority voting modeled on Germany's Bundestag rules, and plenary sessions televised via national broadcasters like RTVA or public fora inspired by the World Social Forum. Drafting methods combine expert commissions featuring jurists from the International Commission of Jurists and comparative advisers from universities such as Stanford Law School with popular consultations, referenda, and constituent workshops held in regions administered by entities like departmental governments in Bolivia or autonomous communities in Spain.

Controversies and Criticisms

Critics highlight risks of politicization by executive leaders, exemplified in disputes involving Evo Morales and constitutional litigation before the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal, challenges to legitimacy when assemblies exclude parties like Puma, accusations of majoritarian dominance over indigenous minorities as discussed by scholars in The Economist and Foreign Affairs, and concerns about judicialization referencing the Inter-American Court's interventions. Other critiques address implementation gaps in resource-sharing provisions concerning companies such as Petroperú, the potential erosion of checks and balances relative to models in Chile and Argentina, and tensions between territorial autonomy and national sovereignty debated by commentators at institutions like the Brookings Institution and Council on Foreign Relations.

Impact and Outcomes

Outcomes include constitutional recognition of plurinationality, new rights regimes for indigenous peoples, territorial autonomies, and institutional reforms that have reshaped parties such as MAS-IPSP and influenced regional diplomacy with neighbors like Brazil and Chile. Empirical evaluations from think tanks like the Inter-American Dialogue and academic centers at Universidad Mayor de San Andrés indicate mixed results: enhanced representation and legal protection in some cases, implementation shortfalls and political polarization in others. Long-term effects continue to be studied by comparative constitutionalists at Yale Law School, London School of Economics, and regional bodies including the Pan American Health Organization where social determinants intersect with constitutional change.

Category:Constituent assemblies