The constitutional lawyer Javier Couso referred to the statements issued this week by the Segpres minister, Giorgio Jackson, who commented on the denomination “fair price” that the constitutional proposal establishes for cases of expropriation, which seeks to put an end to compensation for actual property damage.
“When one looks at the international experience of how this is mentioned in the laws in the world, in the United States it is ‘just compensation’, that is, this term is used, in France the same. Therefore, if one picks up where the constitutional law tradition comes from, there are also several references to this,” Jackson said in an interview on the Twitch platform, later adding that “there are times where, unlike justice, in the case of, for For example, when there is a real estate bubble as happened in the United States, it may be that at some point the market price has nothing to do with what establishes the fair price of a good”.
in conversation with The Counter in the KeyCouso said Jackson “is misinformed and shouldn’t have been.”
Later he clarified that during the preparation of the proposal, the right-wing conventionalists wanted to maintain the same norms currently in force in the Magna Carta, but that “the socialist group proposed the idea of using the expression fair price as what the person who is compensated will receive and for this he had in view nearly four five decades of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court”.
Along these lines, he added that “there is an expropriation law in Chile” that goes into detail in the aforementioned controversy, since “that law will continue to be constitutional under the new wording.”
“There is no surviving unconstitutionality of the expropriation law currently in force. All these details escaped Minister Jackson’s reflection,” he said.
“I think it is important to clarify that in the current expropriation law I do not see anything unconstitutional in it if this new fundamental text proposal is approved,” he concluded.