Aurelio Nuño has given the most intelligent arguments I have ever read or heard in the debate about the Judicial Reform. “The problem is not the popular vote“, says the person who served as Head of the Office of the Presidency of the Republic of, but in the construction of the decision. The choice would only come regime candidatesso that, no matter who wins, everyone obeys “the same one.”The pitfalls of political control“They are in the process of selecting candidates.
It is worth pausing to consider their arguments. First comes the formation of committees in which Executive, Legislative and Judicial powers. Since BRUNETTE maintains the majority, at least in the first two, they “take the lead” to enter the Pre-candidates for judges, magistrates and ministers. In the case of Judiciarythe approval of eight of the eleven is needed Ministers to approve another block of candidates, which means that the “dominant coalition” of the ruling party and its allies have every chance of winning. “That’s the catch,” potentially partisan and committed candidates are on the ballot.
The democracy is enriched by the plurality of origins, a principle that would be annulled by the “committees” at first. In a second time, the number of candidates makes it impossible to vote in an informed manner, which neutralizes another of the principles of the so-called regime of freedoms. Because there are so many, the slogan prevails. To elect the ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice“Each citizen chooses nine from a group of 81. Will you inform yourself about each of them? It is not a matter of interest, but of feasibility.
Finally, the third of the locks is the most sophisticated, because it conditions the permanence of the elected in their “professional career.” The Judicial Council will be replaced by a Court of five members, elected by the same procedure, that is, belonging to “the regime”. The powers of the new body are broad, with the capacity to punish those who do not resolve in the expected terms. The judicial immobility of the judges disappears, subject to the convenience of any resolution.
The arguments of the former Education Secretary expose those who are now part of the opposition bloc. Regardless of the political party, it exposes the inability to invent. Once again, as for six years, the head of the Executive The Federal Government “presses a button” and everyone “reacts” as he expected. Today the opposition appears reactionary, without narrative or alternative. They protest in the terms desired by the government, fearful of the popular will and worried about the privileges of the past.
Ultimately, the most serious thing is blindness, because not only is it not clear how we got here, but where we are standing. The difference between the arguments presented and the vast majority of legal and political experts lies in the seriousness of the criteria imposed for the discussion. Everyone, absolutely everyone, continues to discuss the denaturalization of the Judiciary by being elected by direct vote. However, no one has stopped to think about the reasons for the success of the presidential proposal.
The populist revolt is a consequence of the politics of humiliation. For years, the majority of the population felt the contempt of those who ruled. For those who cannot find work, make ends meet or simply despise the greed of those who, in many and varied cases, occupy the top of the social pyramid, the system is rigged. Those who are considered to be the winners of this mechanism manipulated the paths of their ascent and, in a broad sense, under the protection of a justice system “in their own way.”
No one is interested in whether the judges have knowledge or not, but only in “cleaning up” what exists today. The premise of “knowledge” is not understood as part of the present. Today what counts is that psychological burden filled with distrust, and often resentment, towards everything that represents that past.
So be it.
PS. Nicole, “everyone’s victory.” Happy birthday, beautiful. Stay strong, confident, fulfilled, full of aspirations. In life there are only two feelings capable of moving the world, love and fear. You are clear about which of the two you embrace and, when you doubt, because it is okay to do so and stop along the way, I will always be by your side to love and love each other more, while you get back up to keep smiling. Long live my heart.
Juan Alfonso Mejía has a PhD in Political Science and is a social activist in favor of education.
More from the same author:
#politics #humiliation
