Mexico City.- The Legal Counsel of the Federal Executive (CJEF) described as irresponsible the ruling of the magistrates of the Specialized Regional Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal, in which President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is accused of having engaged in coercion of the vote.
“With an obvious lack of arguments and without any evidence, the Regional Chamber falsely claims that there is an improper use of social programs and coercion of voting by the head of the Federal Executive Branch,” he said.
“The electoral judges fail to provide objective evidence of how a simple expression translates into coercion of more than 35 million people who voted in favor of continuing the transformation of our country.”
The legal office of the Presidency described the magistrates Luis Espíndola Morales, Rubén Lara Patrón and Mónica Lozano Ayala as “pistoliers” because they considered that López Obrador’s statements during the morning press conferences on May 9 and 11 sought to exert pressure on the voters to direct their voting.
The Council rejected the argument of the judges, who warned that the President’s line of argument conditioned the validity or benefits of social programs to a certain political option (Morena) winning the electoral process.
“This is clearly false. The statements made in the judgment are so general and banal that Judge Lara Patrón himself deviated from the reasons given, considering that an exhaustive study had not been carried out,” he said.
“The resolution only states ‘in a dogmatic manner the updating of the violations, without specifying further arguments and carrying out a detailed study of each one of them’; nevertheless, it voted in favour of the project.”
The CJEF stated that, in the July 11 ruling, the judges did not explain which of the social programs was used “improperly,” how the conditions placed on the beneficiaries were materialized, and how this resulted in the coercion of the vote.
“It is therefore irresponsible for a supposedly impartial and independent court to make statements that are not supported by evidence and only make accusations based on the imagination of judges who claim to see beyond the obvious,” he said.
He recalled that the Superior Chamber of the TEPJF itself, in file SUP-REP-301-2024, determined that the issuance of expressions that reflect a political and critical position by the President, as part of the public debate, do not constitute a call to vote in favor of parties or candidates.
Following the criticism, the CJEF reported that it filed an appeal for review so that the Superior Chamber of the TEPJF can analyze the facts again and revoke the sentence “for lacking the minimum elements of justification and motivation.”
He also called on electoral judges to base their decisions on evidence and “not on personal assumptions.”
#Electoral #magistrates #irresponsible #accuses #Ministry
