In an unusual decision, the Mexico City Water Systemby a resolution of its committee transparency, reserved for three yearswhich could be expand to fivethe results of the studies of the contaminated water that they were using for weeks the neighbors of the Benito Juárez mayor’s officebecause “erroneous interpretations” could be generated.
It is obviously a electoral decision. From the beginning of that crisis, Sacmex denied that the water was contaminated and told the neighbors that they better clean their water tanks. It was until the popular mobilization blocked a sensitive transit point in the capital that the public company that controls the supply of water of the city, accepted that the water was contaminatedalthough the head of government, Marti Batresinsisted that this contamination did not come from the pipelines and was even hinted that there could be some sabotage.
Then it was discovered, always according to the authorities who have handled the issue with secrecy, that the problem was in one of the wells that supply the city with water. The place was quickly closed, even using the National Guardand since then tests were carried out whose results were never released. The most widespread version is that the water was contaminated with some lubricanta oilsome oil. It was never known and now we find out that it was not we will know until at least 2027.
The information about the quality of water is public and it is of general interest, cannot be reserved. Half a million people live in the Benito Juárez mayor’s office and many more work and travel through it, and all of them were consuming contaminated water for weeks. The water system cannot “reserve” the information because “erroneous interpretations” can be generated. It is nonsense worthy of a totalitarian State and an underestimation of the capacity of people and institutions to process information, with consequences in many areas. For example, can people who have been consuming that contaminated water have consequences on their health? If so, which ones, what should they be treated with, what were they contaminated with, what can doctors base on to treat anything from a skin disease to a gastrointestinal disease or whatever, if they don’t know what people used and consumed?
What’s more, what “misinterpretations” are we talking about? What can people, society, misinterpret about a problem as objective as the contamination of the water we use, how can we know that this problem will not be repeated? And what measures were taken to solve it and avoid it in the future? And beyond that, what privileges does the authority enjoy to assume that its “interpretation” is correct and that of the people will be “wrong”?
It is a totalitarian act and is added to others that are inexplicable. The federal government has no problem disclosing personal data of people with whom it has differences, from a New York Times correspondent to María Amparo Casar, even in clear violation of the law, but it reserves, hides or considers information that is national security. Obviously it must be public, from the quality of the water to the contracts for public works or the way in which they are carried out, or their costs, government actions, public health decisions and many others. Or the real causes of blackouts and insufficient electrical energy.
I understand very well that there are issues that must be reserved or that are of national security. But truly national security issues are not addressed in the way that democracies do: in the legislature that is about to end, for example, the national security commission has never met, because it was never even met, due to Morena’s responsibility. , to establish its members.
That is why when the president appeals to national security or the need to reserve information, in many cases it is simply a matter of hiding information that should be public and that the government does not want to be disclosed or because decisions were made ignoring the current regulations and laws. The “don’t tell me that the law is the law” also applies in these cases: I want to do something quickly and without having to be held accountable, so I classify it as national security or I reserve the information. It is not legal? It doesn’t matter, when the challenge process ends, the situation that worried me has passed. That is the government rationing that applies both to the issue of contaminated water and to the great works of the six-year term or to clandestine crematoriums and even to the real number of missing persons.
They are authoritarian traits that little by little are spreading to more and more chapters of national life. This is how democracies are consumed.
Bishop Rangel
It’s disconcerting. Bishop Salvador Rangel decided to forgive those who allegedly kidnapped, drugged, and assaulted him and will not file a complaint against them. The truth is that beyond the bishop’s personal decision, if the Morelos state prosecutor’s office headed by Uriel Carmona has evidence, as it does, that the bishop suffered a kidnapping with all these implications, that crime should be prosecuted ex officio, Bishop Rangel, whether present or not, denounces it, because otherwise what remains is a deep suspicion in society.
More from the same author:
#Contaminated #hidden #water