Colombia is characterized by a long constitutional history.
The country is often proud to have been a democracy only interrupted by 3 years
With only 3 years of dictatorship in the county's history.
This is then for sure, so to say, a good sign for Latin America
It has also experienced many constitutional reform processes through its history.
The particularity of the last one to date, that of 1991, is that for the first time in the country's history,
the constitution was modified, was renewed by a Constituent Assembly
and outside the framework of the institutionalized constitutional reform mechanisms which up to then had been the Congress, principally.
It was precisely the idea of using a constituent assembly
which, when elected, was supposed to be broad ranging
and representative of all the sectors of the Colombian society.
And in this sense we can consider that its content was a bet
to effectively be a response to the project of commonly building a society.
What was interesting was, and as I just said, was that it happened through an electoral process.
So obviously we could only have a relatively broad representation, but in all cases limited to the vote, limited to the act of voting.
What was interesting was that the Constituent Assembly counted on the presence of indigenous representatives,
of representatives from protestant organizations. And that was a shock in Colombia
at a moment when all thought that the country did not have Indians and was a mostly catholic country.
So there was this gamble through the Constituent Assembly to effectively
work together on the common project of shared society.
That being said, to say thet it's a perfect reflection of a desire to live together (social contract)
that matches reality is little bit to fast.