1
Act No68
Constituent Assembly
Session of October 24, 1944
Summary:
1. Installation of Session.
2. Reading and approval of the Act of October 21.
3. Discussion of Constitutional Article: Title IV of citizenship.
I. Session begins at 11:20 a.m., presided by the President Mister Doctor Francisco Arizaga Luque, acting as the undersigned General Secretary Mister Don Pedro Jorge Vera, and with the concurrence of the following Honorable ones:
Acosta, Aguirre Miguel Angel, Altamirano, Avilés, Ayala, Alvaro, Baquerizo, Benités, Borrero, Bustamante, Calderón, Carrión, Cárdenas Ezequiel, Cárdenas Emilio, Carvajal Angel León, Cevallos, Coloma, Cordero, Coronel César, Cueva, Chacón, Chávez Ramírez, Chiriboga, Del Pozo, Dueñas, Espinel Mendoza Marcos, Estubiñan, Flor, Gallegos, García, Gómez González, Guerra Casares, Guerra Marco Tulio, Gusmán Matamoros, Guzmán Miguel Angel, Guzmán Víctor, Haro, Gerrería Idrovo, Izquierdo, Jarrín, Kingman, Lanas, Larrea, Ludeña, Lara, Madera, Malo, Moreno, Ormaza, Pacheco, Paredes Julio Enrique, Parra Velasco, Pinto, Plata, Plaza Lasso, Quintana, Rocha, Rodríguez Ernesto, Rodríguez Máximo, Romero, Rosero, Silva Del Pozo, Uzcátegui, Valencia, Vásconez Cuvi, Vásconez Valencia, Vera Loor, Villagómez, Zambrano Alfonso, Zambrano Carlos Monge.
II. Reading and approval of the act of the session of October 21 without modifications.
III. In accordance with the day's agenda, the discussion of the Constitutional articles continues. The Secretary reads Title IV "on citizenship." It is approved. He then reads Article 32 drafted by the Project of the Constitutional Commission that says: "All Ecuadorians older than 18 years who know how to read and write are citizens. Those from Ibero-American countries and Spaniards who meet the requirements of Article 31 are also considered to be Ecuadorian citizens."
The discussion of the first part of the article begins.
The Honorable Cárdenas Ezequiel:
Mr. President: From my perspective, nationality and citizenship are distinct concepts. One understands by citizenship the situation by virtue of which the State grants an individual the exercise of certain political rights, especially that of suffrage. So much has this point been discussed on the part of several Honorable Deputies that we have reached the conclusion that universal suffrage is an utopia, since it is necessary to discriminate against those physically and morally handicapped. I am in agreement with the age requirements in the Commission's Project because this depends more properly on the physical and intellectual abilities of the person. But regarding the second point, I want to dare to request to the Honorable Constitutional Commission, for an imperative of conscience, that the decree be changed to this form (he reads and presents to the Secretary). Because to leave the Constitution like this would grant the vote not only to illiterates but also to those who have not met certain illustrative conditions that qualifies them for the function. For that reason, I believe that we should demand that they have finished primary instruction instead of imposing the condition of only knowing how to read and write, because many learn how to stamp their name and therefore, they meet the conditions to vote. I request that, if this modification is not accepted that I propose, at least it is my opinion in such a sense, because it should be demanded a medium degree of illustration that is to say that have received primary instruction.
The Honorable Altamirano:
Mr. President: When you discussed the fundamental elements related to this part, it was accepted that it would be an Ecuadorian of 18 years that could be considered a citizen and in the Project it is said that it should be older than 18 years. To avoid all difficulty, it would be convenient that it is simply said: all Ecuadorians who have turned 18 years old and knows how to read and to write are citizens, so that the concept is in agreement with that approved in previous discussions.
The Honorable Pacheco León:
Mr. President: It is not my purpose to make a speech, because I do not know how to make them, neither do I seek to convince you with speeches; I simply want to express my thinking regarding the article that we are discussing. I will intervene in this matter as a Functional Representative for the working classes that constitute most of the Ecuadorian population. To accept this decree as it is would leave the majority of that class on the margins of political rights, because workers are primarily Indigenous or montubios who do not know how to read nor write. Frankly, it is disgusting if at the same time they are subject to military conscription, taxes, and road fees, but denied the exercise of their civic rights. I do not want to transplant the postulates of the Russian or Soviet Constitution that gives political rights to illiterates into this one, but yes I want to be clear in my way of thinking on the reach of this Article. I believe that the Honorable Constitutional Commission should have defined political rights to include granting the vote to this majority of the Ecuadorian population.
If it is necessary to exclude them from certain elections, at least they should be allowed to participate in others, such as those of comunas and municipal councils. I want to make my opinion clear, in the name of the class that I represent which are again being marginalized as they have been in previous Constitutions.
The Honorable Flor:
Mr. President: When the Honorable National Assembly desired to make an exception for illiterates, it only and exclusively did so for their participation in the election of municipal councils. It was only to give illiterates practice in voting, and only with the election of municipal councils. This was to be an exception, rather than to be a general rule. It was not the intention of the Constitutional Commission that it become a general principle. All of the Constitutions have required a minimum amount of education, specifically knowing how to read and write, in order to exercise that right. When the moment arrives to consider extending the right to illiterates, it should be considered as an exception and only for municipal councils. But in general, the article should remain as the Commission proposed.
The Honorable Herrería:
Mr. President: In terms of the article that we are debating, I want to make the following observations. As for the first part regarding the age of 18 years and being able to read and write, I am in agreement with the Honorable Constitutional Commission, because I believe that it would create bigger and more intense problems to give the right of citizenship to those unable to read or write. This can be demonstrated in practice. What I believe is that our legislation should create special organisms in charge of the protection of those people, so that shortly those individuals who do not know how to read or write can make use of citizenship rights through the process of eliminating as much as possible the number of illiterates. Regarding the second part, I want to make be that this general disposition, in the future, could create serious problems that would affect the Ecuadorian nationality. I consider that the disposition approved by this Assembly granting nationality to Ibero-American and Spanish citizens, unavoidably has to grant the guarantees of Ecuadorian citizenship; but I understand that there is necessity to restrict the use of that Ecuadorian citizenship regarding the foreigners that conserve their nationality of origin. For example, according to the conformity with the disposition, as it is edited, citizens of Ibero-American and Spanish countries, are entitled to elect and be elected in Ecuador; and I believe that this could mean a serious danger for the country in the future. For this reason I believe that we should edit the second parenthesis of the Art. in the following form: (reads and gives to the Secretary).
The Honorable Alvaro:
Mr. President: The Honorable Pacheco León has already expressed his disagreement with this system of preventing illiterates from voting, and has said that the only exception is for the election of municipal councils. As a result, illiterates are not entitled to the vote, to have suffrage rights. Similar to the Honorable Pacheco, I am also against denying the right to vote to those who do not know how to read or write, because those Indigenous and montubios who find themselves in that situation are also subject to taxes and road work requirements and therefore should be considered citizens. For this reason, I want to register my protest against the way this arrangement has been handled, because I believe that this exclusion should not be total. Instead, we should extend election rights to those who are unionized.
The Honorable Bustamante:
Mr. President: When we discussed giving the vote to military personal, there was concern about the influence that superior officials could exercise over them because of the lack of discipline that granting this right to soldiers could imply. If there were difficulties with that case, we will have even more in granting voting rights to citizens who upon reaching 18 years of age do not know how to read or write, that is to say, to illiterates. Suffrage rights should be a function of highly conscientious citizens who approach the polls to vote for a certain candidate. An individual who does not know how to read could easily be surprised with a change of ballots and as a result, despite a desire to vote for a certain candidate for the Presidency of the Republic or for certain Congressional candidates, be fooled into depositing a ballot with names quite different from his way of thinking. For this reason it is necessary that we consider this point. The man that fulfills his citizenship rights has to go to the polls to exercise that right with full conscience of his acts. For this reason, I will never agree to illiterates having access to those rights. Besides, this prohibition will provide an incentive for those individuals to learn how to read and write and to be incorporated into the culture and civilization, to be entitled to the exercise of citizenship rights.
The Honorable Silva del Pozo:
Mr. President: All of the constitutions, except for that of 1869 that granted the vote only to males, have acknowledged the political duties of women. Nevertheless, the Council of State has received petitions requesting clarification whether women were entitled to exercise the rights granted in our constitutions. These petitions came from various parts of the Republic and even from outside the country. For the sake of clarity, I would propose the addition of the terms "man or woman" that was in the 1929 Constitution.
The Honorable Vásconez Valencia:
Mr. President: It is unquestionable that to exercise citizenship rights one needs to meet certain requirements; I understand that it is a mistake to confuse citizenship with voting rights; citizens are entitled to elect and to be elected and it is impossible that those who do not know to read or write be elected. But that does not remove that in the secondary law that illiterates be authorized to vote in certain situations, for example, in the elections of town councils; but what should be put in the Constitution is that those that do not know how to read or write cannot be citizens. Therefore, the disposition should be accepted as it is in the Constitution of 1938 and as the Commission proposes, with the condition "and that they are registered in the electoral registrations"; but what is related with the voting act, it will be considered in due course of time.
The Honorable Galarza Arízaga:
Mr. President: Two issues are at play in the constitutional decree under discussion. First is a citizen’s political situation in light of the stated requirements, and second the role of this constitutional decree in light of the national culture. As for the first point, the observations and comments made here prove that it is necessary to meet certain requirements, such as being able to read and write, to exercise citizenship rights. Examining our political development illustrates a constant terrible flaw of individuals whose voted are easily influenced. If this happens even to those with a certain amount of education, not to mention those without education, instead of eliminating flaws in the exercise of these rights we would not be forming citizens conscientious of their duties by giving these rights to those who do not know how to read and write.
I believe that at least we have to impose these indispensable conditions on those who participate in such an important act. The other aspect that the Honorable Bustamante already noted is, effectively, that those who do not know how to read or right cannot participate in citizenship rights. This decree provides a powerful stimulus to those interested in the State such as individuals, political parties, or other institutions that participate in the electoral process to mobilize the largest number of their followers through literacy training so that they can participate in the exercise of that right. From the point of view of the preparation of citizens, this decree is especially satisfactory and interesting. For that reason, I support the Article in the form that it has been presented by the Honorable Constitutional Commission.
Discussion is closed and the first part of this article is approved.
Next is the vote on the Honorable Silva del Pozo’s amendment to add the phrase "man or woman" after "all Ecuadorians," but on the request of several Honorable Deputies the Presidency reopens the discussion.
The Honorable Galarza Arízagar:
Mr. President: I believe that it is not necessary to include "man or woman," because in common usage the word man also includes the concept of woman. Therefore, that clarification is not necessary.
The Honorable Chacón Moscoso:
Mr. President: The legal interpretation of the term Ecuadorian would include women, that is, it refers as much to the masculine sex as to the feminine one. But there have been doubts in the application of constitutional law. It would be better that the concept be clearly stated in the Constitution. If the Assembly believes that those words should not be included then it should clarify what rights women have to engage in political acts.
The Honorable Idrovo:
Mr. President: I believe that previously there have been doubts as to this interpretation because woman’s rights to vote had not been granted or used. Now, however, we have in this country a precedent. Woman have already exercised this right. If we do not expressly deny this right it means that we recognize it. It is not necessary since that clarification exists in the Constitution; legal precedents should be sufficient to establish that women are fulling included in voting and citizenship rights.
The Honorable Vásconez Héctor:
Mr. President: I also believe that it is not indispensable to include the wording "man or woman" because ever since the 1906 Constitution women have been granted the right to vote. This issue will be explicitly laid out in the secondary law. Therefore, I do not believe it is necessary to include what Honorable Silva proposes.
The Honorable Silva del Pozo:
Mr. President: According to the Civil Code the term "man" can be used universally, but in regards to the 1906 Constitution, many claims were presented to the Council of State and for that reason I believe that this should be clarified in order to avoid new petitions.
Discussion is closed, and the amendment is voted on. The Secretary informs that there are 32 affirmative votes among 63 voters. In response, the Presidency consults the Chamber if this motion could be considered approved, and at the same time requests a definitive clarification on how articles are approved.
The Honorable Chacón Moscoso:
Mr. President: Mathematically we should understand that there is majority in this voting, with 32 votes in favor of the notion and 31 against; but parliamentarily the voting not being in agreement with the practice we would have to conclude that there is not such a majority. I believe that at the moment, to avoid discussions on the point that has been raised we should simply vote the issue of whether or not to accept the vote for the woman.
The Honorable Gallegos:
Mr. President: We need to re-vote to be sure that the Honorable Assembly truly has decided to include the terms "man or woman" in the article as the motion proposed. I support the motion of the Honorable Silva with a slight change in the wording so that the article says "all Ecuadorians without distinction of sex are citizens," etc.
The Honorable Zambrano Carlos:
Mr. President: I believe that the motion has not been defeated because 32 votes in favor of it are more than the 31 against. I also believe that the voting should be rectified.
The Honorable Vásconez Cuvi:
Mr. President: While we were voting some Representatives entered. It would be good to announce again the question that is under discussion and to re-vote, since the new votes could resolve the issue and avoid repetitive discussions on this point under consideration.
The Honorable Uzcátegui:
Mr. President: In any case it is indispensable that it is resolved the criteria by which a majority of votes is understood so that we have a norm in the future. For the case of the reconsiderations, a two-thirds vote is needed, as the regulation expressedly indicates. In terms of majority, the regulation does not say anything and we have simply abided by the parliamentary practice of considering as a majority half of the votes plus one. But observe that constantly decisions are adopted that according to the conveniences, in a sense to other, being arrived in occasions until to request the suspension on determined resolution and I believe that an unique approach that serves us should exist as a norm for the future. For this reason, if I find support I make the motion that it is declared as a regulation that it will be understood the simple fact that for a majority that there is at least a single vote more, in the difference between the two results obtained in a voting. We have been adopting an approach that is very relative and meanwhile we need to give firmness to our resolutions.
The Secretary puts in consideration the presented motion that says:
"The absolute majority it will constitute a vote in favor of a difference between two controversial thesis."
In discussion of this motion, with a second from H. Madera.
The Honorable Silva del Pozo:
Mr. President: Regarding the impropriety that the H. Gallegos has found, does not exist, because the explanatory concept that, according to my motion, I request that it consists, since it is observed in some Constitutions, like those of 1929 and 1938.
The Honorable Madera:
Mr. President: I have supported the motion of the H. Uzcátegui, because it creates a norm for future cases. Many corporations have established the number of members that constitute them has to be an object that the majority defines in various matters, as happens in the case of town councils, that are composed of five, seven and nine members, because then the majority is three, four, and five. In the concrete case that concerns us, a voting with thirty two affirmative votes and thirty one against, it cannot decide that there has not been resolution that there has not been majority.
The Honorable Estupiñan:
Mr. President: I believe that it is indispensable that the H. Assembly resolves what it understands as a majority of votes, so that a norm exists for a procedure in the future. As the H. Madera has said, in the case of the town councils, they are integrated by an odd number and the majority constitutes the half plus one. In the resolution that to this respect the H. Assembly dictates, it should be sufficiently recovered, for not creating conflicts regarding the resolutions that are adopted in the future.
The Honorable Ludeña:
Mr. President: I think that we should adhere to the parliamentary practice consecrated by our Congresses, although the regulation does not say it expressly. The present case does not come out of the mess and these difficulties can continue in the future. Given that, as the previous issue I propose that we reopen the discussion of the article, with the additional proposal in the new representatives, this problem of the voting will surely be eliminated with the new votes once they are counted.
The Presidency, at the request of the Honorable Ludeña, reopens the discussion. The Honorable Gallegos formalizes his motion to add the words "without distinction of sex" after the phrase "all Ecuadorians."
Before voted on the motion of the H. Uzcátegui, the addition proposed by the H. Gallegos is voted on and approved, and as a result the first part of Art. 32 under discussion will say:
"All Ecuadorians, without distinction of sex, older than 18 years, who know how to read and write are citizens." The discussion continues on the motion of the H. Uzcútegui:
The Honorable Pinto:
Mr. President: Abiding to the strict criteria of majority, I understand that it is not necessary that it exceeds with an unit of more than half of the everything so that there is this majority. The literal sense of this word means that it exceeds the other part. For example, if we have eleven absolutely equal units and we put six on one side of the scale and five in the other one, we will see that it will lean to where there are six, that is there there is the majority. It is my view on the matter.
The discussion is closed, the Secretary reads the new phrasing, and it is approved. The Secretary reads a proposed amendment by the Honorable Cevallos and Idrovos to add a second part of Article 32 that says:
"Even those who do not know how to read or write, however, will be able to exercise citizenship rights to elect municipal councils, according to Article 19."
In discussion:
The Honorable Cueva Tamariz:
Mr. President: In the general pronouncements that were made regarding citizenship and suffrage to the Honorable Assembly, I am already in agreement that illiterates only be given the vote for electing municipal councils. The Commission has taken this approach and is including it in the corresponding chapter, under the Suffrage section that we will consider in due time. This chapter defines citizenship, and establishes the conditions to acquire it, to suspend it, and to lose it. I do not believe that it is proper to place the amendment of the Honorable deputies Cevallos and Idrovo in this section, because it only defines fundamental aspects of citizenship. Defining this concept in the previous article, specifically that the rights of citizenship are for those who have turned 18 years of age and know how to read and write, the exception is only for suffrage, but not for citizenship in general, with all its duties and rights, because we do not give the right to be elected to those who, without knowing how to read or write, have turned 18 years old. Given that, I agree with the idea of the motion but it needs to be in its proper section, and one that we will probably discuss later today. I believe that this is not the appropriate place to consider that proposal.
The Honorable Cevallos:
Mr. President: In fact, I agree with what the Honorable Cueva Tamariz states. However, since this part discusses the essence and not function of citizenship, and as it defines the essence of citizenship as meeting the requirements of being 18 years of age and knowing how to read and write, it seems logical to me that when we deal with the essence of citizenship we should consider those aspects related to its essence and not those with the function of suffrage. For that reason allow me to make the amendment. But if the Honorable Assembly believes that this is not the moment to consider it, I abide by its decision.
The Honorable Paredes Julio Enrique:
Mr. President: Allow me to observe that this is going to be a totally useless debate, because in the mimeographed article that was just distributed I see that this issue is considered in the decree that says: (reads). Therefore, I believe that we should set aside this debate for the moment because it deals with the fifth title of the Constitution.
The Honorable Cevallos in agreement with the Honorable Idrovo withdraws the proposed amendment.
Fuente: “Actas de la Asamblea Constituyente de 1944,” t. 5, pp. 1-16 (October 24, 1944), Archivo Palacio Legislativo, Quito, Ecuador. (Please note: some corrections remain to be made to this translation.)
| e-archivo ecuatoriano | Marc Becker's Home Page | marc@yachana.org |