The afternoon of yesterday the State Attorney General’s Office published two communications of high relevance, first, that the rector and former rector of the Autonomous University of Sinaloa they remain linked to the process by improper exercise of public service; and that to Jesus “M” is kept current the precautionary measure of temporary suspension of office.
In it second statementit was announced that the Third District Court of Sinaloa confirmed the link to the process and precautionary measures of the Acquisitions Committee of the Autonomous University of Sinaloa. He judge declared unfounded the concepts of rape expressed by the complainers and on the other hand, founded the arguments of the FGE.
Let’s go for the first, they highlight that the ruling issued by the Third District Court on the link to process and precautionary measures imposed on the rector and former rector of the UAS charged with Improper Exercise of Public Service related to the irregular acquisition of meat productsis still firm and still in force.
The FGE also clarified that it does not share the criteria adopted by the Judge and will file the appeal for review within the time limit for its presentation. Likewise, they consider that sufficient and effective test data were adopted to prove as probable that the rector and ex-rector of the UAS They were aware of the irregular acquisitions made by the Acquisitions Committee.
They explain that the sentence notified to the FGE corroborates that the accused officials are public servants as they have been appointed to a position as rectors of the UAS. Although it is a decentralized body of the State, it is part of the Parastatal Public Administration of Sinaloa whose autonomy was not violated.
Regarding the second issue, the Prosecutor’s Office informs that they were notified that the legal arguments they expressed are declared founded and resolves that the connection to the process was legal and the precautionary measures imposed on the accused contemplate the temporary suspension of the charge imposed.
Furthermore, the FGE makes it clear that in the ruling of the Federal Court, university autonomy is not violated in any of its aspects of self-government and self-regulation, which is why they consider the concepts of violation claimed by the defendants to be unfounded.
They explain several points; first, that the accused are public servants; and second, that the Autonomous University of Sinaloa is part of the Public Administration of the State as a decentralized parastatal body; and third, the UAS is obliged to carry out acquisitions through the public bidding procedure.
The list of points follows: fourth, they point out that the acquisition is illegal as the exception is not proven since they are perishable goods; fifth, that the FGE did establish the time, place and circumstances of the execution of the act in the formulation of the accusation; sixth, that it is not a violation of the principle of legal certainty that the UIPE has carried out investigative acts without a prior complaint.
In summary, they point out that the ruling clearly and precisely states the scope of university autonomy and that the State Attorney General’s Office acts in accordance with the legal system. They are reiterative in mentioning that the connection to proceedings against UAS officials are issues of legality, where the procedures of every person who manages public resources must be respected.
Political Memory. “Power does not corrupt. “Fear corrupts, perhaps the fear of losing power”: John Steinbeck.
@HectorPonce99
More from the same author:
#UAS #Dome #process #precautionary #measures
