National Constituent Assembly, a good choice?

Now that Colombia has rejected the peace treties with FARC,is a National Constituyent Assembly the way to boost peace in Colombia. (Not only with FARC but with paramilitary groups like Gaitanistas or leftover guerrillas like ELN)

Although that is an option it won´t serve a lot. Due to is the National Constituent Assembly is chosen to end this conflict. Uribe could be again president, if this happens he would not try to sign peace withe the FARC. Like he has a desire of revenge, because the FARC killed his father. So he will do what he did when he was president, killed or eliminate the FARC by using bullets. Which means the country will enter again in the state of war. On the other hand changing a hole constitution costs a lot of money and in case Uribe gets chosen as president changing the constitution will have served for nothing and will have been wasted money.

La Xime wrote:Although that is an option it won´t serve a lot. Due to is the National Constituent Assembly  is chosen to end this conflict. Uribe could be again president, if this happens he would not try to sign peace withe the FARC. Like he has a desire of revenge, because the FARC killed his father. So he will do what he did when he was president, killed or eliminate the FARC by using bullets. Which means the country will enter again in the state of war. On the other hand changing a hole constitution costs a lot of money and in case Uribe gets chosen as president changing the constitution will have served for nothing and will have been wasted money.

What if the assembly could permit FARC and other illegal groups to leave guns?

juancamilobustosg wrote:Now that Colombia has rejected the peace treties with FARC,is a National Constituyent Assembly the way to boost peace in Colombia. (Not only with FARC but with paramilitary groups like Gaitanistas or leftover guerrillas like ELN)

I think also that it is a solution developed in less time, the problem is that it is not the most effective solution. The most effective solution is to leave our constitution as it is and being patient until a viable solution came to the spotlight.

Changing our constitution isnt the solution for peace and the NO winning. Making the national constituent assembly is giving the ooportunity to people like Uribe or groups like FARC the right to do "what ever they want" to the new constitution. Who is assuring us Uribe could change things to be president again? Who is totally sure FARC are not going to change our political beliefs in the document? A lot of things can be change that will have a bad effect on our country.

In my opinion, a national constituent Assembly would be the worst option for our country. Remember that our country is still dealing with criminals that have not paid for their crimes and giving them the right to change the Constitution at their will is like leaving your car open hoping that it won't get robbed. I can think in many bad ways in which this process could be used for.

Camilo.DlH wrote:In my opinion, a national constituent Assembly would be the worst option for our country. Remember that our country is still dealing with criminals that have not paid for their crimes and giving them the right to change the Constitution at their will is like leaving your car open hoping that it won't get robbed. I can think in many bad ways in which this process could be used for.

I agree with you Camilo,but you should take into account that our 1991 constitution was also constructed with a big participation of an ex-illegal group called M-19. In fact, the greatest iconic leader of that legal mogvement was one of the three constituyent presidents on the assembly(Antonio Navarro Wolff)

This picture portrays him on the National Constituyent Assembly of 1991. (He is the one of glasses)