I do not believe that the decision to proceed with an immediate investigation based on an anonymous complaint and without evidence against the former president of the Supreme Court, Arturo Zaldívartoday converted into one of the spokespersons of the Claudia Sheinbaum campaignhelp the cause of preserving the independence of the judiciary and preventing the disastrous initiative that President López Obrador wants to promote.
Research is seen as a political coup very similar to those used by the 4T in these years of government against its adversaries. I am not unaware of the deep animosity that exists between the former president of the Court and his successor and several other ministers against Zaldivar. Nor the existing and understandable annoyance because a former president of the Court is promoting a reform that if carried out will imply a subordination of the Court. SCJN to political power, or Zaldivar has jumped so quickly from the Court to party work.
But the investigation in question has too many dark chapters. First, it is a political piece, a speculation, which could be part of an opinion text but is not accompanied by evidence, as any report should have, which makes it judicially useless but politically useful.
Second, it is an anonymous complaint: it is deeply striking that it was addressed just one day after it was filed and without evidence to support it. Third, it plunges the judiciary into a crisis in which it was already in but which now explodes publicly and that transcends Zaldívar, Alpizar and other leaders of the Court and reaches judges and magistrates.
The judiciary remained with a relatively united front in the face of President López Obrador's attacks and initiatives to reform the judiciary, but with this investigation that front will be left with at least serious fissures. I do not like anonymous complaints nor the use of protected witnesses and their conversion of criminals into accusers in exchange for testimony that has no evidence.
For a change this is a problem that createdin this last public stage, President López Obrador with that statement that he asked Zaldívarwhen I was president of the courtthat see special casespoliticians, of interest to the executive. It is not new, it is new that it is said in that way and with that irresponsibility.
With that door open, added to the prominence that Zaldívar has had in the media and in the controversy over the hypothetical judicial reform, the elements were in place for the presentation of a complaint of this type and to give direction to the investigation. I don't know, but without material evidence I don't think much progress can be made, but it does paradoxically serve to feed those who want to get rid of the autonomy of the judiciary.
I think that Zaldívar, who has always been a high-level jurist, is wrong to play politics with the López Obrador reform of the judiciary, which goes against what he has always defended. I think Norma Piña is wrong to also enter a political game where she has nothing to gain by using the instruments that she always disqualified, anonymous complaints. I believe that no one will win from this clash except, as always, those who want to subordinate the judicial power to the political power. The roots of the scandal and the breakup have already been planted.
Pensions
Morena's initiative to confiscate the pension funds of those over 70 years of age is a very serious precedent for the future. These are private, individual funds that the government does not have the right to use, it could be a lot or a little money, it does not matter: it simply does not belong to the government, it is what the workers have saved throughout their lives. It may be that if there are funds that are unused for a long time due to the death of the pensioner or because they have not been claimed, and that these resources go to a specific fund, but it is not acceptable or legitimate for the State to expropriate and decide their destination. of resources that are not theirs, that the workers have saved. The initiative must not pass and if it passes it must necessarily be declared unconstitutional.
From milk to contaminated water
In February 2000, the Bety milk scandal broke out. It was sold by brigades from radical sectors of the then PRD headed by Martí Batres and who supported López Obrador's candidacy for Mexico City, at less than half the price of the milk sold by the federal government. The problem was when a study was carried out on it and it was discovered that, first, it was not milk but a substitute, and second, that it was contaminated by feces. It was never really known what happened to that story and what was behind the sale of that whitish liquid contaminated with fecal matter.
Twenty-four years later, with Martí already as head of the city government, the contaminated water crisis explodes in the Benito Juárez mayor's office. The neighbors have been protesting and blocking for more than a week and there is no answer as to the origin of the contamination. Here we said on Friday that the seismic fault existing in the area where the contamination occurs and that has generated several microseisms in Mexico City could be what causes cracks in the pipelines, as could clandestine taps, huachicol. The authorities deny it but still do not know what is happening. Martí says that the water is not dangerous, but he recommends that neighbors better not consume it.
More from the same author:
#Fractures #bills #Court
