The Electoral Court of the Judicial Power of the Federation (TEPJF) approved declaring that the revocation process of the mandate of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is invalid because it was not possible for 40 percent of the electorate to participate as required by the Constitution.
after yesterday MILLENNIUM revealed that the opinion eliminated 21 pages in which they exhibited the lack of electoral integrity, this morning they were included in the sentence where the complaints of all the political parties were rejected, which was not well seen by the magistracies that since yesterday asked not to include it .
Likewise, with a surprising change, which led to a majority of votes, it was approved to give a hearing to the corresponding instances so that they investigate and determine the responsibilities of the public servants who repeatedly incurred in possible electoral crimes.
“That they investigate and, where appropriate, sanction potentially violative acts and the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office will be alerted about potential illegal conduct that should be investigated,” they indicated.
The count confirms the participation of 16 million 502 thousand 636 people, 17.77 percent of the total of those registered in the Nominal List of Electors.
The presiding magistrate Reyes Rodriguez Mondragon exposed, first, the legal infeasibility to grant the complaints of the opposition parties that sought the annulment of the process, since it was already invalid since it only reached 16 million 502 thousand 636 votes, the 17.77 percent of participation of the 40 percent necessary for which, logically, “cannot invalidate what is not valid.”
Then he read the section on electoral integrity that he had discarded and that he resumed this morning, where he showed that the INE received 323 complaints for improper use of public resources and of illicit origin, violation of impartiality and neutrality by public servants and irregularities the day of the voting day as possible carries.
“It is possible to notice that there were the following lessons: first, the late issuance of the Federal Mandate Revocation Law, the Congress incurred in a legislative omission and this affected the rules of the game; second, the various modifications of the INE that had to adapt to the late law and respond to legal problems during the process.
“Third, when the Chamber of Deputies and Deputy issued a decree of interpretation and it was approved by the Senate, which generated controversies and questions about its constitutionality. And hand in hand with the regulatory challenges, there are the budgetary adjustments that generated a reduction in polling places and the shortage of personnel and supplies, from the point of view of electoral integrity, this is an example of what is known as bad practices with an impact on the quality of participatory democracy.
Therefore, it concluded that all these obstacles and irregularities in the process “had an impact on the democratic quality of the revocation of the mandate”, which it reported in a solemn session in front of the heads of the INE, of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN ) and the Ministry of the Interior (Segob) that would follow his process before the corresponding instances.
“Finally, this Superior Chamber, on the one hand, instructed the INE and the Specialized Regional Chamber to investigate and, where appropriate, punish potentially irregular acts that were denounced during the process and, on the other, warned the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office Electoral Crimes on possibly illegal conduct that you may need to investigate.”
Revocation, a failed act of democracy: Janine Otálora
The irregularities and constant violations committed in the mandate revocation process, as well as the contempt of first-level public servants, confronted the magistrates of the Superior Chamber who divided their positions between those who demanded that possible electoral crimes be investigated and those who who considered the position as “hasty”.
One of the strongest positions was that of Judge Janine Otálora, who described the process as “a failed act of democracy”, maintained that it was the responsibility of the Superior Chamber to support “the acts that distanced participation and that they be evidenced so that are not repeated” and so that the tools of democratic participation “given to citizens are not distorted”.
He made a report of the entire process and the obstacles that were experienced, among which he highlighted the criminal complaint filed by the president of the Chamber of Deputies, Sergio Gutierrez Luna, against six directors of the INE, as well as the attitude of the Legislative Power “reluctant to comply with the rules that they themselves promoted”, “damaged the rule of law and the democratic value of this exercise”.
And he considered it essential “to vindicate the mechanism to revoke political power in the face of the loss of trust and legitimacy, since it cannot be allowed to be corrupted by transforming it into ratification, because this time, we have witnessed a revocation promoted by passive actors, corrupting the principle essential”.
Otálora described as “very serious” that from the stage of collecting signatures and until the day of the vote, public officials violated the laws and the decisions of the TEPJF and the Court.
“The law prohibits government propaganda, a rule that was not complied with; the court determined that the promotion is only from the INE, which was ignored. We thought that our democracy was armored but today bad practices from the past appear. It would be a warning of the weakening of our institutions and would imply an energetic call to defend the conquests for which they have fought.
“We cannot allow this exercise to become an experiment for future electoral processes. The fact that the highest public servants challenge the institutions is not a good omen, democratic legitimacy does not end with obtaining a majority of the votes and the democratic risk cannot be set aside by discouraging citizen participation with the threat that can be annulled, this process demands restraint from everyone”.
Judge Felipe de la Mata Pizaña lamented that in this process it seems that “the laws are insufficient or fall short” when they are made to be respected and seek to violate or even modify them.
“Yes, it is noteworthy the existence of behaviors carried out by public servants that put the model of political communication at risk and more serious than in 15 cases the INE determined non-compliance due to a stubborn attitude of public servants by not abiding by the decisions of authority and refuse to comply with the normative mandate.
“If it is believed that the law hinders our goals, one cannot make a country without first doing justice and to do justice one must respect the laws, the formula is simple, the idea is simple”, and showed that 320 complaints are still pending to be resolved in the Specialized Regional Chamber where, among other things, the improper use of public resources must be determined.
In a position that generated confusion and that initially was understood to be against the project but that ended up achieving the majority, Judge Felipe Fuentes considered it essential that “this Court be emphatic in pointing out that the procedures must continue their course.
Conclusion is hasty and prejudges conduct; sentences are not bulletins: Vargas
Judge José Luis Vargas, who since yesterday requested that the electoral integrity section be eliminated from the opinion, voted against its inclusion in the ruling on the challenges of political parties, considering that they are future projections and hasty prejudgments, Dozens of challenges be ongoing.
“The conclusion is somewhat hasty since there are a series of resources and administrative trials that run their course with alleged irregularities with precisely the revocation of the mandate, the question that would generate and pose is what was the urgency of having an opinion today and a solemn session, when the mandate revocation law itself establishes that the final computation must be carried out, not in a certain time, but it does say ‘once all the challenges that have been filed are resolved’.
Vargas criticized that the project of the presiding magistrate Reyes Rodríguez Mondragón “falls into delicate vices of inconsistency” and stressed that “I have always been an enemy of judicial activism”, since he considered that this sentence should be taken more seriously because “it is not a statement or a Press release”.
Judge Mónica Soto supported this position because she considered that “it is in no way for this electoral authority to issue a statement when they are not part of the Litis and when we are not doing an in-depth analysis of this procedure.
“This institution could be put in a position to take it beyond a legal analysis. The question would have to be what is the legal reaction? Would it be the reinstatement of the procedure? The consequence in any case would have to be legal and not discursive”.
In which the magistrate Indalfer Infante González agreed, who warned that “at this time no value judgment or positioning can be made, it should be in punitive trials.”
However, the proposal was approved by four votes and the trials that are still pending in the Specialized Regional Chamber that could lead to new hearings for Fepade against specific public servants will be confirmed one by one.
EHR