The social networks and the widespread use of cellphones as camera and screen have made the citizenship becomes potential witness of acts outside the lawand above all diffusers of those acts, from photos and videos. Perhaps in legal and legal terms it is not easy for these visual materials to become evidence before a court.
What is a fact is that each time the state and general prosecutor's offices of the republic are being socially demanded to initiate actions of investigation and prosecution of justice in the face of these acts criminals. Examples are the videos of criminals hitting transporters in Guerrero. It is not an issue to discuss whether these criminal acts existed before in Mexico and its federal entities. No one could doubt that hypothesis. What is a fact is that today the communication tools, the cellphones used as photography and video camerasare informing society and law enforcement bodies of current criminal actions.
Of social action
Citizens increasingly make use of these devices to exhibit the excesses of criminals, as well as officials who misuse their force as authority and attack citizens. Social action is essential for the various State bodies in matters of public security and justice, at its three levels of government (federal, state and municipal), to act against crime and abuse of authority.
Technological advances have allowed cell phones to be accessible to a large part of Mexican society. Now, it is the job of public officials to function. Otherwise they could even be co-participants in the criminal action. In court it may be difficult. But in the face of social action without a doubt.
At that point, it is essential to point out that Mexico is a democratic regime. And in a democracy, the rulers of the three levels have a period of government, and then elections are held. In the federal one, the President of the Republic is elected (six-year period), the senators (six years) and federal deputies (three years) of the Congress of the Union. In the state, the Governors of the federal entities are elected (six years) and the local deputies (three years) of the local Congresses. Finally, at the municipal level, the Municipal Presidents, Unions or Trustees, Attorneys and Councilors of the City Councils of each of the municipalities of the federal entities of the country are elected.
Paragraphs: Accountability
This leads us to the fact that in the Mexican democratic regime the exercise of the vote, of each citizen, is in fact an exercise of accountability of the government action of each elected public official. Regardless of the level of government. That is, each election, citizens decide whether the ruling party continues in that role in the presidency of the republic (federal government), in the governorships (state governments), and in the city councils (municipal governments). Likewise, if a senator, federal or local representative is endorsed, in legislative management. And there is a citizen process that has internalized this judgment of accountability. For example, in the legislative function, it is enough to remember that in 1995 the majority of federal deputies of the party then in government, the PRI, approved the increase in the Value Added Tax (VAT) from 10% to 15%. And, in the 1997 elections for federal deputies, for the first time in the political regime resulting from the 1910 Revolution, the PRI lost its majority in the Chamber of Deputies. In addition, he lost the head of government of the country's capital, then the Federal District, to the PRD, with Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas. Subsequently, consolidated Mexican democracy has given countless examples of this exercise of accountability that Mexican citizens carry out based on the possibility of alternation. To continue analyzing.
For suggestions and comments:
E-mail:
More from the same author:
#recorded #criminals