text:
tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-40892852396905173062016-05-25T16:27:52.951-05:00Mexico VoicesAddressing Mexico's ChallengesReed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-26888125404196418572016-05-25T16:27:00.000-05:002016-05-25T16:27:53.005-05:00Mexico Public Security: Government Fumbles Police CoordinationReforma: Manuel J. Jáuregui*

Translated by Rachel Alexander

In politics, as in football, fumbling the ball on the field can be very dangerous. Unfortunately, when it comes to security, this is what we have in our Magical Mexico: fumbling the ball against the fearsome League of Organized Crime. A recent international study that evaluated the functioning of police forces in 127 countries put Mexico in spot 118, tied with Zambia and Honduras. The worst thing is that our police are not only bad, but there are also many of them.

Several days ago, an ex-police chief said, regarding the extreme violence in Acapulco, that the problems wasn't so much that the police had been infiltrated by organized crime, but more than the police were the organized crime. The cherry on this cake of insecurity fomented by the existence of bad cops is a complete lack of coordination ... the "loose ball" to which we refer.

There is no coordination between municipal and state police, nor between federal and local police, and less still among the Army, Marines and the federal police with each other and local forces.

The disorder is gigantic and widespread, resulting in rising crime rates in nearly all parts of the country. The question arises in passing: and how is the organization of the National Gendarmeríe [a unit of the federal police created by president Enrique Peña Nieto in 2012 to combat organized crime] going? One of the main promises of the present federal government's campaign looks to be half done, as it's far from being a fait accompli.

But we digress. The disorganization to which we refer has made the supposed fight against insecurity waged by this and previous governments useless. Topics like "certifications" have become jokes, and there are many police who can't even pass a urine test, much less a test of trustworthiness. In various Mexican city, like Acapulco, nothing prevents the hiring of police who haven't passed tests of trustworthiness: more than 700 of their officers have "failed."

It's also worryisome that when there are important efforts by society to contribute to social peace, as happened in Nuevo Leon, where corporate leadership came together to monitor, fund and coordinate the creation of a Civil Force, which helped to reduce crime rates, along with Army and Navy, the new "independent" government has not been able to sustain the effort, and crime rates have soared again, bringing the public perception of insecurity to 2012 levels, after the birth of the new police force in response to insecurity raging in that area.

Nuevo Leon business leaders have made note that instead of patrolling, Civil Force vehicles can be found stationed at their headquarters (built on private land with private funds), with no satisfactory explanation from the state government about why a police force structured from its inception with trusted agents is not being used in full, and if this inaction is the result of incompetence, lack of resources, lack of desire or all three together. This serves as an example of the things happening in our Magic Mexico that are counter to security and contribute to the growth of violence.

Instead of dedicating himself to promoting the "gay agenda," it would be better for President Peña to make changes to his cabinet and the structure of the federal police to make coordination effective, follow up on the inconclusive formation of the Gendarmería and reintroduce the presence of the Marines and Army in the communities most affected by insecurity.

If the president wants there to be gay adoptions, he first must create a social environment of peace and tranquility for future generations. In other words, strive to control the ball, and after that's done, then worry about "gender equality." First is being, next is how to be.

Reforma only allows subscribers to access its articles online.

* Manuel J. Jáuregui is a regular columnist for Reforma
Rachelhttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-38803221941401414752016-05-25T12:29:00.000-05:002016-05-25T12:29:19.639-05:00Mexcio Torture: NGO's Warn of 'Counter-Reform' to Law Against TortureCNN Expansion: More than thirty organizations and academic institutions expressed regret that, in the midst of recent revelations of cases of torture, the General Law on Torture will not be considered during the special session of Congress [in mid-June], while the Miscellaneous Penal Code containing regressive changes regarding this crime will be.

Edgar Cortez Morales, of the Mexican Institute for Human Rights and Democracy (IMDHD), considered it a risk that reforms to the National Code of Criminal Procedure, known as the Miscellaneous Criminal Code, will be approved which will lower the quality of the General Law to Prevent, Investigate and Punish Torture, legislation which should have been adopted by January 6 of this year, so, instead of improving things, there will be contradictions.

Cortez Morales, a member of one of the more than thirty organizations that called on the Senate not to approve the amendments, said:

"I think they are trying to enact a counter-reform even before the [new criminal justice] system [of oral, adversarial trials] begins operating throughout the country," and that, instead of effectively fighting torture, "they open the doors".
According to the 35 organizations signing the petition, the Miscellaneous Criminal Code contains some characteristics which are a regression to the Law of Torture, such as legalizing the "stroll", i.e. the practice that detainees are not put at the disposal of the investigative authorities in the place where they were detained, but the person can be taken to a different location "for security reasons or due to the characteristics of the event being investigated."

Also, when a detained person files a legal compliant of torture, the proposed legislation suspends for an indefinite time the maximum period time they can be held in preventive detention [held without bail, pending trial], i.e. a person falsely accused by using a confession made under torture could spend years in jail, causing the victims of these crimes to desist from making such complaints.

The organizations also point out that it eliminates the right of a defense lawer to present evidence at the initial [arraignment] hearing, so, for example, if a person has a video that shows he was in another country on the day of the crime, it may not be presented at the initial hearing.

Senator Angélica de la Peña Gómez, of the PRD, [Party of the Democratic Revoluton] and chair of the Human Rights Committee of the Senate, expressed concern that some provisions are reversals of the new criminal justice system mandated in 2008 and are regressive, so she said, it is important to pay attention to the recommendations of the organizations, especially when there are controversial issues that ought to be reviewed.

"We will not will initiate the system which guarantees due process of law if we are still introducing precepts from the old system. We will enter a kind of schizophrenia. The National Code of Criminal Procedures cannot have doubts in its wording," she said.
According to the organizations, a series of recent events, including videos that expose federal and state police hurting civilians, the statement of an official of the Attorney General of the State of Mexico that recognizes the fabrication of crimes as an "everyday" practice, the report of the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (IGIE) on the "historical truth" regarding the Ayotzinapa case, which recognizes the fabrication of declarations by the accused, and the Tlatlaya case "are just a sample of the daily practice of torture".

"While torture persists instead of investigations, thousands of victims in Mexico will not have access to truth and justice, and the adversarial, oral trial system (which comes into force on June 18) will not work," they stated in their press release.
Therefore, the organizations made a strong call for the Senate not to approve the proposals made in the draft of the Miscellaneious Criminal Code, to be presented to the extraordinary session of Congressm, to be held from June 13 to 17.

In this regard, Senator de la Peña Gómez said that is necessary to address what the organizations are pointing out and that it be analyzed by experts in the field.

"If the legislation is badly written, if you still have hidden twists and rules that come from the old system, then we will fail in implementing it properly," she said.
Organizations defending human rights, such as the Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez Human Rights Center, the All Rights for All National Network of Human Rights Organizations and the Mexican Committee for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights, among others, called on the Congress to show a clear commitment to the eradication of torture. Spanish originalReed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-12382772288352857882016-05-25T10:21:00.002-05:002016-05-25T10:22:17.784-05:00Mexican Elite's Bad HabitsAnimal Politico: Pablo Majluf*

Translated by: Amanda Coe

Children of premodernity, the Mexican elite are barely enlightened. From that, a series of notorious disorders follow: indifference towards the public, emphasis on inequality and privilege from birth, extraction of income from properties, lack of refinement, etc. It is a conservative position, which results in a people always distrusting their leaders.

It is already close to a historical axiom that Mexico did not exactly reach the 18th century, that period, commonly called the Age of Enlightenment, the origin of liberal democracy. After two centuries of religious monarchy, we missed that revolutionary moment in which privileges were eliminated and replaced by universal law, meaning it applied to everyone. It happened in France, the United States, England (though it did not overthrow its monarchy, it limited it) and all the countries we call modern, in other words, that overcame their medieval classes.

Here, liberalism arrived very late—in the 19th century—and quickly was corrupted. Even though its key promoters, such as Benito Juárez, effectively revoked privileges from colonial power groups—especially from the Church—they did not remove their own privileges. They used the law in a discretionary and selective way. Juárez imprisoned and killed enemies, ignored Congress, rewarded his friends, etc. It is no coincidence that we inherited a 34-year dictatorship (the Porfirato [dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz, 1876-1911]), followed by another 71-year one (the hegemonic PRI, [Party of the Institutional Revolution, 1929-2000]): each with its own version of the law imposed from above.

The elite, incidentally, have not always been the same people. It can be said that they have changed four times: when the Spanish arrived; 350 years later, during the Reform Movement [of Juárez]; at the beginning of the 20th century, during the Mexican Revolution; and at the beginning of this century, with the fall of the corporate system [PRI's control of sectors of society such as workers, teachers and farmers, by incorporating them into government-controlled organizations].

However, most importantly, what has not changed is the fact that privilege is ensured by being on the pedestal. The people have changed (more or less), but they have done little to the structures. So the Mexican elite have never really been restricted—note their eternal impunity.

This premodern condition produces elites who feel they don't owe anything to the people. For three simple reasons: first, because they were not actually elected by them. Rather, they were born privileged or associated themselves with privileged people (some of them for decades or even centuries), so that not only do they not consider themselves part of the people, but also they assume their privilege as destiny. Second, because they have no one to answer to, no one who can remove them when they are questioned. Moreover, the legal system doesn't have priority over them; to the contrary, they have priority over it. And thirdly, because they were not educated in the high art of governing, but instead in the bad habit of perpetuating themselves, they don't understand themselves to be servants but as the worthy ones.

With that lack of awareness of duty, it is too much for them to ask themselves why the fourth generation heirs of a family close to power for 90 years [since the founding of the PRI] would have to worry about practicing republican virtues. Why would they be interested in caring about the citizenry or educating those who could replace them? If the Mexican elite are so durable and conservative, if the instruments to oversee them are so unsuccessful, why would they be interested in encouraging a meritocracy where there isn't room for priviledges of birth? In few words, why would they want to kill themselves?

The elite in modern countries are (slightly more) virtuous because, otherwise, they could not be the elite; the people, through their representative mechanisms, would remove them. That is the 18th century's legacy, which never reached here. Having said that, it is perfectly valid to ask why the Mexican people have not been able to build those representative mechanisms for themselves. Spanish Original

*Paul Majluf is a journalist and teacher of Communication at the University of Sydney, Australia. He is also coordinator of digital information for the Espinosa Yglesias Research Center (CEEY).
Amanda Coehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-31189218673683762032016-05-24T16:40:00.000-05:002016-05-24T16:41:51.344-05:00Mexicans' Damned Bad Mood
Sinembargo: Rita Varela Mayorga*
Translated by Melanie Orr

During an interview with the newspaper, La Jornada, which was published yesterday, President Enrique Peña Nieto coined the type of phrase that delights political cartoonists and serves as a major talking point for reporters and publishers.

According to the President, the cause of the Mexican people's bad mood is clear: social networks, which

"have undoubtedly had an impact on mood, as there are obviously all different kinds of things being expressed, freely. There is no censorship of any kind in Mexico. There is no doubt that social networks have brought about changes in social feelngs, in mood and in the way we express ourselves."
Furthermore, Peña Nieto explained that these digital applications have turned into a public square, where different voices are heard.

"These applications have an impact on different sections of the population. The opinions voiced can be well-founded, or not," he stated.
Peña Nieto's interpretation of the Mexican people's malaise, including a feeling of despondency and rejection towards his government, had the opposite effect than we suppose he intended it to have, something which has happened throughout almost the entirety of his time in office.

We imagine that his explanation aimed to highlight the progress and prosperity achieved almost four years into his term: which "generally, is going well for everyone", stating that "we are making progress", that the economy is growing "not at the rate that we would like, but still at a significant rate". He also declared that the National Anti-corruption System "will thrive" and that he did not understand "when the blame fell upon the government" for the Ayotzinapa disappearances…

However, we say that the result was adverse, because blaming social networks and their users is not enough to divert the general public's attention and the attention of experts from reality. A reality which screams its complaints about the inefficiency of those who govern and public employees at all levels to fight the country's evils, complaints which are enough not to cause bad humor but rather, rage: impunity, corruption, embezzlement, conflicts of interest, violence, inequality, poverty, unemployment, human rights violations and so the list goes on.

So, yesterday there were people who complained to the President for blaming the damned bad mood that Mexicans suffer from on the internet.

With perfect timing, Antonio "Tony" Garza, ex-US ambassador to Mexico (from 2002 to 2009) and current president of Vianovo, an international firm specialised in positioning brands vis-a-vis public opinion, published an article where he stated that the federal government's disappointing results

"stem from congressional jockeying, a void in political leadership, and a dogged (and somewhat perplexing) focus on the economy at the expense of almost everything else."
Despite the fact that President Peña Nieto's popularity has fallen to 30%, presumably influenced by worries about the rule of law in Mexico and the rise in violence, he said:

"there has been little deviation in the administration's strategy and messaging."
Referring to Enrique Peña Nieto's declarations, Tony Garza declared that

"it should be no wonder then that Mexico is in a 'bad mood'.

"Peña Nieto and the rest of the government should be championing anti-corruption and other rule of law initiatives and reforms first and foremost for Mexicans and their country's future. Alleviating Americans' concerns should be nothing but a happy byproduct of these efforts. Yet without politicians who listen to Mexicans and adjust their priorities as realities evolve, the government is unlikely to project a better image either at home or abroad. And, unfortunately, no public relations campaign will be able to fix that," wrote Garza. See full Garza article from Austin-American Statesman
Who is better positioned to advise Peña Nieto than Garza who, referring to his "sense of perspective", points out that "a good sense of humor and an understanding of life" is part of his DNA as a consultant.
Also, in accordance with results published yesterday by the Espinosa Yglesias Studies Center (CEEY), the Mexican people's "bad mood" and specifically that of consumers - those who can still buy things-, is caused by negative prospects about the country's future economic condition, including the lack of upturn in household income, low wage jobs, informal employment [for cash], the increase in poverty, increased taxes, the perception of corruption and growing distrust regarding the federal government's ability to boost the economy.

So all should be calm, but the bad mood that Mexicans are currently experiencing does not stem from social networks: that is where it is voiced. It comes from somewhere else, this we know well. Spanish original

*Rita Varela Mayorga is deputy director of content for Sinembargo
Melanie Orrhttps://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-24540573624031349752016-05-24T10:58:00.001-05:002016-05-24T10:58:22.558-05:00Inter-American Human Rights Commission Faces Unacceptable Budget CrisisLa Jornada: Editorial

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (CIDH) announced yesterday that the serious financial crisis it is facing will force it to dismiss 40 percent of its staff, cancel visits to countries on the continent and suspend the hearings scheduled for July and October, in which the commissioners would listen to victims, civil society organizations and government representatives regarding various cases. The agency warned that this will worsen the delays in the proceedings underway regarding human rights violations.

The Commission is a subsidiary of the Organization of American States, which provides a substantial part of its budget of almost 5 million dollars annually. Other donors, such as the European Union, reduced their contributions last year, and governments in the region provide just $214,000. In contrast, the executive secretariat of the organization fixed the annually desirable budget for its proper functioning at 30 million dollars.

It is important to consider that, among all the organizations of so-called inter-American system (i.e., organizations in which the United States and Canada come together with Latin American and Caribbean countries), the Commission is one of the few that play an essential role, given the weakness of law enforcement institutions and ombudsmen in several countries in the region.

In our country the Commission has played a key role in the analysis of several cases of serious human rights violations. The most recent is that of the events in Iguala on September 26, 2014, [police attacks on and disappearance of students from the Ayotzinapa rural normal school] in which the inter-American organization has participated as a supporting body, both through visitors and with the formation of the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (IGIE), whose work made it possible to detect errors and deviations in the official investigation and proved invaluable support for the families of the victims.

It is necessary that governments in the region take responsibility to provide the budget that the Commission requires for optimum performance. If that does not happen, the risk is run of losing one of the factors restraining the authorities on matters of human rights and that impunity levels will increase.

It is hoped that the leaders of the hemisphere will not fall into the deviation of denying funds to a body which, by the very nature of its mission, criticizes and cautions them when they commit serious abuses against citizens. Acting in that direction would be an act of unpardonable shortsightedness and pettiness that would undermine the rule of law.

Therefore, the societies of the continent should consider the collapse of the Commission for budgetary reasons to be unacceptable and require their respective governments to come to the rescue of the multilateral body. Spanish originalReed Brundagehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-11200548038360078902016-05-24T10:08:00.001-05:002016-05-24T10:08:17.765-05:00Mexico and the War on Drugs: a Recipe for Human Rights AbusesInsight Crime: Mexico's Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez Human Rights Center reports that impunity over human rights violations in the country generates an unconscionable mixture: the economic and political interests of organized crime go unscathed, while the most marginalized and often innocent people face the worst consequences.

The criminalization of the sale and consumption of certain substances, under the model known internationally as 'the war on drugs', has been increasingly criticized in a variety of global forums due to its evident failure as a strategy to end the use and abuse of prohibited substances, as well as its impact in filling prisons with people accused of non-violent crimes.

When this model is adopted in a country where the rule of law, accountability or respect for human rights has not been consolidated, the negative impacts are multiplied. This is the case in Mexico. Read full articleReed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-12983783204764025852016-05-23T14:26:00.002-05:002016-05-23T14:26:54.705-05:00Mexico Politics: Time for an Independent Citizen as President?Reforma: Denise Dresser*

Translated by Amanda Moody

Whore. Trojan horse. Barefoot Carmelite [nun]. "PRIAN" agent [de facto alliance of PRI and PAN parties]. Incongruous. False. A sell-out. These are just some of the epithets that have been thrown at me since I said that I wasn't ruling out standing as an independent candidate for the presidency.

Since that day, I have heard and read opinions about myself, and my motivations, that reveal the political primitivism of Morena [Movement for National Regeneration], the social conservatism of PAN [National Action Party], the usual dirt of a PRI [Party of the Institutional Revolution] attack, and also an absolute misogyny which has even reached the "learned commentocracy". I've read comments that anyone who has a mother, a wife, a daughter or a sister should be embarrassed to have written. And yet I'm still here, cleaning off the buckets of testosterone which are thrown at me daily.

Because I also touched the hope of those who have an understanding of something which might seem quixotic, ridiculously idealistic. I have received messages from those with whom I have lobbied, marched, pushed, pressured, fought over the last fifteen years, on one front or another. In the Supreme Court against the Televisa Law [giving monopolistic powers to the two TV networks, Televisa and TVAzteca] and in favor of "I the Taxpayer" and the decriminalization of abortion. In the Mexico City Human Rights Commission, in the News Divine case [disco club in Mexico City from which a number of youths were kidnapped and murdered] and many more.

In the Senate, opposing the appointment of Medina Mora [ally of Peña Nieto, to the Supreme Court] and driving for a Supreme Court with "no quotas and no cronies". On the street, marching for justice and truth in Ayotzinapa and for a life without violence for women in Mexico. In the National Electoral Institute, trying to achieve deregistration of the Green Party [because of its violations of election campaign laws].

In election campaigns, demanding the reduction of party funding and the presentation of the "3of3" [proposed legislation requiring that public officials and candidates make public their tax returns and statements of assets and investments] because if candidates are not willing to do that - the minimum - they don't deserve to receive our vote, let alone to govern. Also, years of denouncing monopolies and those who protect them. Years of defending freedom of expression when they restrict it.

I and many more, promoting the decriminalization of marijuana and equal marriage and a robust National Anticorruption System supported from below and from outside. Civic causes, all. Causes that transcend ideological affiliations and party loyalties and political geometries. Causes seeking a more decent and less decadent government. More representative and less predatory. More transparent and less opaque.

And amongst the many things we have learned in these muddy, uncomfortable, sometimes lonely trenches, is that the parties have not been there. Many of those who now put themselves forward as "independent" have not been there, giving their support and time and energy. The likely partisan candidates such as Miguel Ángel Osorio Chong [Secretary of Government Relations, PRI] or Margarita Zavala [wife of former President Calderón of the PAN] or Andrés Manuel López Obrador [head of Morena] - they have not been there.

And this does not mean that I am morally or intellectually or politically superior to any of them. But it does mean there is something that - it seems to me - they are failing to understand. These are not times for providential saviors, nor for corrupt or conservative leftists, nor for kind and respected wives of former presidents whose government would be a facsimile version of what we have now. As a wise friend told me: these are times for citizens, for rebels, for women, for movements against the status quo. These are times for innovative ideas to address the three themes of this time: growth, corruption and people taking on their role as citizens.

I do not claim that my ideas are unquestionable, but I think they could contribute to the honest, energetic, pointed, demanding debate we ought to have - and deserve to have - as a country. While making a decision hand in hand with the people whom I love most, I affirm one thing unashamedly: I am not motivated by the power or the fame or the money or the starring role, but by a phrase of Vaclav Havel that has resonated ever since I read it, "the ability to do something because it is good and not because it will succeed".

The opportunity to take up and defend and expand what has been achieved from below. More Mexicans walking with straight backs, with strong spines, with dignity regained just because they are demanding what they had previously never thought possible. These modest, indirect, long term achievements that are changing how power is exercised in beleaguered Mexico. The achievements of our time. I want to stand there, defending them - while we go for more.

Reforma only allows subscribers to access its articles online.

Denise Dresser is a Mexican political analyst, writer, and university professor. After completing undergraduate work at The College of Mexico, she earned her Ph.D. in Politics at Princeton University. She is currently a faculty member in the Department of Political Science at the Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM), where she teaches courses such as Comparative Politics, Political Economy and Contemporary Mexican Politics. She has taught at Georgetown University and the University of California. In December 2015, she was decorated as a Knight of the Legion of Honor by the French government. Twitter: @DeniseDresserG
Amanda Moodyhttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-76125520930182228132016-05-23T10:19:00.000-05:002016-05-23T10:29:49.209-05:00Mexico Drug Cartels Hold Global DominanceLa Jornada: Simón Vargas Aguilar*
Translated by: Joel Cloke

It seems as if the Mexican government has made a mistake with their strategy to capture cartel leaders within the context of the war on drugs, seeing as that in the end the facts are showing that contrary to growing weaker, they are strengthening. According to recent reports by international anti-drug agencies, Mexican drug traffickers are in a clear global expansion.

Ever since the call for the so called war against drugs during the six year presidential term of Felipe Calderón, the results coming from the capture of the drug bosses are limited, considering that the leadership from within the cartels are renewed quickly, sometimes through violent fights with serious consequences for the society that, more and more, lives in a constant state of insecurity.

During all these years Mexican cartels have demonstrated their ability to adapt when faced with the changing conditions of the drug markets: they diversify themselves, they transform, they experiment. The message is clear, they are not planning to give up the power and supremacy that they have managed to achieve in the last decade. Furthermore, the cartels are going to continue producing and trafficking illegal drugs as long as there is a demand for them.

Their superiority is such that in its 2015 Annual Drug Threat Assessment, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) claimed that the Mexican cartels represented the greatest drug trafficking criminal threat, even more so as there are no groups that threaten their power. Likewise, they pointed out the strongest cartels: the ones from Sinaloa, Juárez, Golfo, and Jalisco's New Generation.

Over the years Mexican organizations have been evolving ever since they stopped being just traffickers in order to become producers, although this means competing in the U.S. market with their old partners, the Colombians. According to a recent report sent by the DEA to Congress, Mexican drug traffickers are competing for the markets on the East coast, with the introduction of brown heroin or black tar heroin, and by developing new techniques to produce heroin in the form of highly refined white powder.

Mexican traffickers in the past had dedicated themselves to supplying brown heroin of lower quality to the small West coast markets, meanwhile the Colombians provided top quality white powder heroin to the lucrative markets on the East coast. The Mexican's change to the production of white powder heroin had already been announced by the DEA in October of last year. In another document they reported a 50 percent increase in the cultivation of opium poppies in Mexico, primarily in the states of Guerrero, Durango, Sinaloa, and Chihuahua.

However, what has the U.S. government alarmed is that the Mexican heroin producers have started to product heroin with fentanyl: a potent synthetic opiate used in analgesia and anesthesia, known for its great ability to cause addiction. Although the DEA's assessment notes that Colombian heroin continues to dominate the U.S. market, the picture could change with the growing introduction of Mexican heroin.

The same thing seems to be happening with methamphetamines; a report from the Nigerian anti-drug agency warned about the presence of a Mexican criminal cell in their territory, after discovering a super lab capable of producing up to four thousand kilos of the drug by boiling, which was operated by Mexican technical experts. For the American government this is a sign of the expansion of a Mexican criminal group in Western Africa.

The news of the frequent participation by the Mexican drug traffickers in the U.S. methamphetamine markets is not new, above all the cartel from Sinaloa, considering that for more than a decade Mexican and U.S. authorities have carried out regular seizures of this drug, and despite this the amount of seizures still shot up in the last few years. For example, in New York they surpassed the 6 kilos confiscated in 2012, with 44, 55, and 66 kilos in 2013, 2014, and 2015 respectively.

According to Insight Crime (a think tank specialized in the study of Latin American organized crime), one of the reasons for the diversification of the Mexican drug trafficker could be that they are seeking to compensate for the profit losses that have occurred because cocaine consumption in the U.S. has been reduced, and the legalization of marijuana in various states in that country has opened up that market to a larger competition.

As we can see, what's weakening the drug cartels, whether Mexican or Colombian, is the lack of profits because of lower demand, either because consumption is dropping or because of legalization, as with marijuana. This data is another example of how the war on drugs, as it was proposed, has not resolved the problem; organized crime continues to operate. Spanish original

*Simón Vargas Aguilar is an analyst of themes of security, justice, politics and education.
Twitter: @simonvargasaJoelhttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-89124106723473557732016-05-20T17:14:00.001-05:002016-05-20T17:14:38.903-05:00Mexico Military's Revitalized Impunity Animal Politico: Andrés M. Díaz Fernández*

In our country, the Mexican Military is practically untouchable. Not only do they not listen to those who examine their current role in Mexican society, they pay no attention to the evidence we present them with. Without trying to invent a story about its importance or role in national history, the main thing is that the Military, just like any other State institution, is to be held accountable in cases where people's human rights are violated.

The Military, in the words of some, continues to have high levels of trust, but has also suffered setbacks in this regard, as demonstrated by INEGI [The Mexican National Institute of Statistics and Geography] in the National Survey of Victimization and Perception of Public Security (Envipe) in 2015, which says that the Army, along with the Navy are causing a decline in public confidence. Regardless of these figures and the methodology they used to come up with them, the important thing to point out is that the Military presence in Mexican streets–which has been more visible since 2006–has added to the feeling of insecurity among the people.

Countless speeches have been heard and read justifying the "public security" work carried out by the armed forces (Secretariat of Defense [Army], Secretariat of the Navy [Marines]), in the face of the wave of organized crime rocking the country. Since day one of his administration, Felipe Calderón said that "re-establishing security will not be easy or quick (…) it will come at a high cost in monetary terms, and tragically, in terms of human life".

This was the expected justification for a period of extrajudicial executions, forced disappearances, tortures and other serious violations of human rights which were carried out mainly by the armed forces, but not entirely. What is to be made of these tragedies, when the Army's own leader, General Cienfuegos, recognizes military intervention in the war on the streets as a mistake?

The assessment is in the form of a before and an after. After the Second World War, when the role of the military within countries was being remodelled, Mexico decided to use it to control a growing threat known as "international communism". The creation of police-military-paramilitary groups caused a vast quantity of human rights violations against members of the population who rose up in arms, protested in political spaces and the media, and which even involved universities and students. [the so-called "Dirty War" of the 1960s and 70s]

As crimes of the State, with their apparent lack of integrity, torture and forced disappearances were the total methods of investigation and the de facto punishments of conduct that, for the military and some political groups, were a national threat, regardless of whether they would meet the requirements for punishment within existing criminal law.

Thanks to this channel of impunity, that not even a change of party in power could counteract [from the Party of the Institutional Revolution, PRI, to the National Action Party, PAN, in 2000], the deck was stacked once again, now by the National Action Party for a new period of systematic human rights violations which continues today with its former creator [return of PRI to the presidency]. It is a continuity of State violence, although it does not correspond to the official discourse against impunity. It is testimony to the fact that, in Mexico, the views of some public officials and people who think the same way about "national security" are valued more than trampling on human rights.

They are not isolated cases; we have seen it before. Yet with the media exposure and the opportunity we now have to write and protest in public forums, time and time again we see definitive marks of impunity. In this context, there is the new impunity regarding the Tlatlaya case. We first learned [in June 2014], in terse form, of an event which killed 22 people "on one side" ["criminals"] and nobody "on the other" [soldiers].

At first sight, the State of Mexico Government praised the army for these events. The survivors were accused and mistreated [two women were tortured by the police to support the Army's version]. The Attorney General carried out a scarcely productive investigation and then a federal judge ruled that there was insufficient evidence to support an accusation in the criminal justice process. All this demomstrates that one of the facets of justice, punishment of those responsible, is not applied when dealing with soldiers.

This new impunity mixes with recent modifications by the Congress of the Military Code of Criminal Procedures and the reform of the Code of Military Justice, which to some "facilitates the conditions for a state of exception". Instead of finding ourselves in a scenario where we citizens believe that we could achieve greater transparency and access to justice, we find ourselves faced with a scenario of limitations to our rights and in which we are forced to give up our rights for the sake of supposed "national security". Some people don't seem to be able to understand that could be achieved with a full regimen of protection of our human rights, that is to say, within the rule of law.

All we ask for, as citizens, is truth, justice and reparation. Each and every one of us has a right to these things. Spanish original

 *Andrés M. Díaz Fernández is a Human Rights investigator for @FundarMexico.Reed Brundagehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-72223480694192198902016-05-20T15:38:00.001-05:002016-05-20T15:38:28.084-05:00Mexico: Tlatlaya Case Mired in Impunity: UNAristegui Noticias: The United Nations expressed concern that the Tlatlaya case is "still mired".

"We are deeply concerned that, nearly two years after the commission of serious human rights violations in Tlatlaya, State of Mexico, including allegations that at least 12 people were extrajudicially executed, the case remains mired in impunity and the victims continue to be denied their rights to justice and truth," the spokeswoman for the UN High Commissioner for Human rights, Ravina Shamdasani, said from Geneva.
She recalled that, according to the National Commission of Human Rights, in June 2014 in a warehouse in Tlatlaya, twenty-two people were deprived of life, of which at least 12 were extrajudicially executed. Seven soldiers were arrested in connection with the case but, in October 2015, a judge dismissed charges against four of them and last week, the other three were freed on the ground that there was insufficient evidence against them.

During his visit to Mexico in October last year, Ra'ad Zeid Al Hussein, High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the Tlatlaya case would be closely watched as a test of the commitment of the authorities in the fight against impunity, given the reform of the military Code placed the military under the jurisdiction of the civil courts in cases of crimes committed against civilians.

Ravina Shamdasani said:

"We fully respect the independence of the judiciary and we take note of the statement made by the Attorney General's Office that it would continue to present evidence 'in order to prevent that the crimes committed in Tlatlaya go unpunished'.

"We call on the Mexican authorities to ensure a rigourous, effective, impartial, independent and prompt investigation in this landmark case. We also urge the authorities in the enforcement and administration of justice to act on the highest standards and human rights standards in the investigations and trials.

"The investigations should be extended to cover all those found responsible, including senior military officers who may have had command responsibility, as well as those that could have altered the crime scene or ordered such alteration.

"Other alleged human rights violations related to Tlatlaya case should also be rigorously investigated, including arbitrary detention and torture of witnesses.

"Given the importance of forensic evidence in this case, we appeal to the authorities to urgently implement the recommendation made by the High Commissioner last October to establish an adequately funded national, independent forensic institution. This will certainly strengthen investigations in this and other cases.

"Our office reaffirms its commitment to assist the relevant authorities and to support and assist victims and their representatives," she concluded.
Spanish originalReed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-12178603920057813872016-05-20T14:22:00.004-05:002016-05-20T15:00:05.380-05:00Mexico: When Torture Is Seen As HarmlessAnimal Politico: Ernesto López Portillo*
Translated by: Alexander Graham

Torture is widespread in Mexico for one simple and obvious reason: it is neither investigated,nor prosecuted, nor punished, of that there's no doubt. The question is how to change this. It is time to remember the words of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture:

"Torture is widespread in Mexico. It typically occurs in the initial stages between a detainee's arrest and his appearance before a judge. With the aim of extracting information and punishing the prisoner."
As we already know, the Mexican government denied the allegations and denounced the work of Juan Mendez, responsible for the inquiry.

But reality is much stronger than politics, evidence of how widespread torture is in Mexico keeps emerging. The latest images and investigations to surface from the State of Mexico and Nuevo León further confirm the situation. Videos depicting torture at the hands of soldiers, the federal police, and agents of the Attorney General's office tell us of torturers who have acquired expert knowledge in the field. An expert knowledge refined through repetition and practice, and through this, a loss of all empathy or feeling for the victim.

In a journalistic report about Nuevo Leon, it states that the Nuevo León State Human Rights Commission confirmed 119 cases of torture had been committed by state police between 2007 and 2015, none of which culminated in criminal sanctions. Sergio Mendez, who documented the cases from the second Investigative Unit of the Nuevo León State Human Rights Commission, says:

"They tortured everyone, all the way up to a lady accused of stealing her employer's jewelry"
This investigative journalist reminds us that the very facilities where most of the torture took place (the State Investigation Agency) according to the Commission, were the only ones in the whole country that the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture was prevented in entering when conducting the investigation supporting his report on Mexico.

At the Institute for Security and Democracy (Insyde), we know that torture practices are embedded in the Police's regular procedures and that the justice system avoids the investigation, pursuit, or punishment of such actions. Many of the testimonies the institute receives on this come from trial lawyers specialized in criminal matters, from police officers, investigation experts, and prosecutors i.e. our convictions are not based solely on the victims' accounts.

At Insyde, we have cross-referenced numerous accounts from both employees of the criminal justice system and also from those who have been tortured. The evidence is ample enough to confirm the diagnosis of the UN.

At Insyde, we have left behind the question of whether or not torture is widely used in Mexico. Now we are centred on the implementation of the necessary tools to stop it from happening again. Those of you who wish to know the long list of technical instruments Insyde has compiled to improve laws and methods of investigation, punishment, and redress of torture can find it at Sin Tortura.mx. These technical tools and various other types we have been designing take charge of attacking the legal and institutional arrangements that are making torture possible.

In layman's terms, the police understand and use torture as part of their routine work. It is a tool they use simply because they can, and without repercussion. At any given moment, there are unmonitored arrests and the police determine when and how to use torture to extract information, extort money for themselves or for third parties in organized crime networks, but also as a mere power trip without any concrete benefit at all.

We have taken testimonies from police officers who have been threatened for refusing to participate in torture or other crimes. We also know that torture is recognized by the police themselves as a practice used by those who really know how to perform their police duties. At the foundation of this widespread torture by the police we find a value system that, far from condemning torture, exploits it for its own, numerous interests.

But we have learned something else that is equally or perhaps even more important: the pervasive nature of torture thrives on the political and social tolerance thereof. In other parts of the world they have long recognized that widespread and serious violation of human rights feeds on a combination of various systems of tolerance and as a result it can only be stopped when all torture-permissive elements move towards its condemnation.

In Mexico the bulk of political leaders, and of society itself, did not pay attention to the words of the UN Special Rapporteur. Meanwhile, the aforementioned videos seem only to be the headline of the day and nothing more, at least when looking at it from its position in the public eye.

We seem to have entered into a terrible paradox: knowing more about the widespread use of torture in Mexico, including witnessing it, is perhaps strengthening our tolerance thereof. While torture is more visible, so too is the tolerance for it. Maybe we are talking about another kind of torture, one that does not cause pain. Harmless torture. Spanish original

Ernesto López Portillo is founder and director of Insyde, the Institute for Security and Democracy, a multi-disciplinary research organization dedicated to analyzing the structural lacks and weaknesses of Mexican government institutions related to security and human rights. A lawyer by training, he is considered a leading Mexican expert on security and human rights issues. @ErnestoLPV
Alexander Grahamhttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-31165839358816404922016-05-19T21:53:00.000-05:002016-05-19T22:14:14.709-05:00Mexico Press Freedom: Special Prosecutor for Crimes Against Press Doesn't FunctionSinEmbargo: Darío Ramírez*
Translated by Leslie Castillo Navia

Manuel Torres, a journalist from Veracruz, was killed on May 14, 2016. He is the fifth journalist to be killed this year. Manuel had recently launched a journalistic project called MT News, which had intended to record and report facts in the towns of Poza Rica, Tuxpan, Tamiahua, Tantoyuca and Papantla. Manuel Torres died in the most dangerous place to practice journalism in Latin America: Veracruz.

From the year 2000 to 2016, nineteen journalists have shared the same fate as Manuel, and all of the cases are in a state of perpetual impunity. Four other journalists are missing, and from 2009 to date, a total of 239 attacks on the press have been recorded. Veracruz is hell for the press, although Gov. Javier Duarte and his inefficient Attorney General, Luis Angel Bravo, claim otherwise.

In fact, the Attorney General's Office in Veracruz, which Bravo is in charge of, did not even have the decency to highlight in their announcement the fact that Manuel Torres was a journalist. They thought that by not pointing out this fact of public interest, Manuel's murder would pass as just another one in the state. They know that national and international public opinion have pressed in favor of greater security for journalists in Veracruz. But virtually nothing has been achieved. The Veracruz prosecutor does not know how to investigate, but he does know how to practice politics.

We have another sleepy prosecutor, not the one from Veracruz cited above. The one who stands out for his absence, such as when Manuel Torres is assassinated, is prosecutor Ricardo Nájera Herrera, in charge of the Special Prosecutor for Attention to Crimes Against Freedom of Expression (FEADLE). He is a prosecutor who receives an onerous salary but lives in the shadows. Perhaps that is for the sake of the discretion that he needs for his productive work. But no, his work surpasses inefficiency. Not a single case in his record has been resolved. There is nothing to show that indicates it is all right to pay him that salary.

For Ricardo Nájera, Torres' homicide did not even deserve an official statement. Pardon the irony, but perhaps Nájera has not been notified that five journalists have been killed so far this year. Or maybe he found out and chose to stay in a comfortable silence while the anger and social unrest (moodiness as Enrique Peña Nieto called it) passes, and peace returns to his office.

FEADLE must disappear, and the first person that has to go is Ricardo Nájera. Why pay a prosecutor who shows no results? But the problem of FEADLE came before Nájera. We must seriously ask ourselves why we have an prosecutor's office that came into existence in 2010 and six years later does not have a single perpetrator in jail. Since FEADLE was created, 49 journalists have been killed. What FEADLE has to brag about is that they have not been able to provide sufficient evidence for a judge to punish an attacker of the press.

Six years ago, FEADLE was created due to pressure from civil society organizations. What they wanted was to have a specialized and efficient section of the Attorney General's Office to investigate cases of violation of freedom of expression, especially cases of violence against the press. Over the years, its legal framework has been growing stronger. That is, it has been given greater powers so that the federal government investigates violence against the press rather than state authorities.

It now has those powers, but it still prefers to remain in anonymity and not go out to defend this country's freedom of the press. At the beginning of its creation, it was good news and its creation was a sign of political will. Today, it is a shame to have a prosecutor's office that does not investigate, does not make public statements, and stays rudely silent when faced with the precarious and dangerous situation experienced by our press.

FEADLE has to disappear. In fact, until the latest draft in the reform of the federal Attorney General's Office, the intention has not been for it to remain in place [a reform of the federal Attorney General's Office is under consideration that will make it more independent from presidential control]. I do not know if the intention was to make it stronger, although I doubt it. As a community, we need to analyze what form it should take, because the current prosecutor only serves as an office for receiving complaints and grievances.

Every year, the prosecutor and members of the government go to Geneva or Washington, D.C. and argue that we have a prosecutor's office to deal with cases of violence against the press. They toss out numbers like that of open investigations or the number of presentations of cases to judges, but they never say that they have fulfilled their purpose: to put attackers of the press in jail. The numbers dazzle an international community unaware that those numbers are no more than a dissimulation of work and a reflection of the lack of real results. The last case ignored by the FEADLE is precisely the case of Manuel Torres.

To remove Nájera does not solve anything if the future of FEADLE is not reconsidered, or if there is no clear sign of a renewed political will on the part of the current administration. FEADLE does not do what it was created to do, and the impunity regarding journalist cases is promoted by FEADLE itself. What we cannot do is continue watching as a journalist is assassinated every month and Prosecutor Nájera shelters himself silently in his office. To stay in the situation we are in would only make us accomplices of the impunity in which the 97 assassinated journalists lie. Nájera has to give an explanation, and I am afraid that the endless figures cannot deal with the heart of the problem: impunity, lack of access to justice, and of a State which guarantees freedom of the press.

So, if we want to overcome impunity, making FEADLE disappear and reformulating it would be a good first step. Maybe this way, the murder of journalist Manuel Torres will be diligently investigated. Spanish original

*Dario Ramírez is the Mexico director of Article 19, an international organization which defends freedom of expression and information. He studied International Relations at the Iberoamericana University and has a Masters in International Law from the University of Amsterdam. He is the author of numerous articles on freedom of expression, access to information, media and human rights and he teaches journalism. He worked in the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees United Nations (UNHCR) in Latin America and Africa. @DariormrsLeslie Castillo Naviahttps://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-23658896181847601882016-05-19T17:31:00.001-05:002016-05-19T17:31:43.363-05:00Betraying Mexico's Democracy: "Judas" Election Bargain Between Peña Nieto and Felipe Calderón in 2006Reforma: Lorenzo Meyer*
Translated by Rebecca Nannery

...If in a supposed democracy a supposed democratic party makes secret agreements with a non-democratic party to transfer 200,000 votes so they may call them their own and therefore help them to defeat a third party, the essence of the exchange is the betrayal of the popular vote and of the democratic spirit equal to Judas' New Testament betrayal for 30 pieces of silver two millenniums ago for giving his Master to his enemies.

This notion came about in a revelation made by Álvaro Delgado in his latest book, "The Cohabitation. The Secret Pact between Peña Nieto and Calderón and Other National Action Party (PAN) Betrayals," (Mexico: Process Editions, 2016).

There, in the opening pages, Delgado refers to an evening meeting in Hotel Nikko in Mexico City, between the governor of the State of Mexico, Enrique Peña Nieto, and the Presidential candidate from the PAN [National Action Party], Felipe Calderón. The meeting took place before the 2006 elections. Peña Nieto was accompanied by two future Secretaries of State, Luis Videgaray and Jesús Murillo Karam, while Calderón had Juan Camilo Mouriño at his right hand who would later take a cabinet position also and Ulises Ramírez, the on-leave mayor of Tlalnepantla.

The accomplices left their bosses alone so that they could agree on the nature of the pact which they would inform them of later and swear them to secrecy. The governor, whose state had been dominated by the Party of the Institutional Revolution (PRI) for 77 years straight, promised to oversee the transfer of 200,000 PRI votes to the PAN candidate and to help them in their determination to prevent their common enemy, the leftist Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO, of the PRD, Party of the Democratic Revolution), from winning the Presidency.

Two hundred thousand doesn't seem like a huge amount amongst the total number of validated votes for 2006, around 42.8 million, but they are crucial if officially in this election Calderón only bested AMLO by 243,934 votes.

Furthermore, if of the 200,000 votes from the State of Mexico are added to those that could have resulted from the telephone call made on the 2nd of July by Elba Esther Gordillo, the once powerful leader of the National Union of Education Workers (SNTE) to the PRI governor of Tamaulipas, Eugenio Hernández Flores, where the union leader, and according to a recording from that time, urged the governor to abandon the PRI's unworkable candidate, Roberto Madrazo, and to immediately give his support to Calderón (presumably Gordillo had similar conversations with other governors also). Therefore, the margin that gave Calderón the presidency can be explained through agreements just like the one at Hotel Nikko.

It is not without irony that today Peña Nieto is the President of Mexico and that Gordillo is behind bars [being held on charges of embezzlement of union funds], when in a situation that changed the nature of the political transition of Mexico, both played for the same side. Peña Nieto, Gordillo and others managed to effectively prevent the triumph of AMLO, but also they prevented Mexico from consolidating a genuine electoral democracy and in its place created this unfortunate political hybrid we now suffer through.

 A Country of Citizens and of Subjects

Delgado claims to have confirmed the existence of the 'Hotel Pact' with two sources who remain anonymous but finally with Ulises Remírez. However, he does not explain how in a system that prided itself on having two impartial and professional referees- the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) and the Federal Electoral Tribunal (TEPJF)- that a governor could orchestrate the exchange of thousands of votes.

That transformation would simple be impossible in a system of suffrage that is free, secret and unchangeable, populated by citizens. But if it is assumed that, in our case, there are several Mexicos, and while one is made up of citizens, the other is one of subjects, then yes, it is possible. It is the subjects acting within networks of clients that make it possible to manipulate the vote not just by thousands, but by millions.

In 2006, just as in 2012 and as it will surely happen in the next local and presidential elections, many ballots will result from that old colonial heritage which has survived until our time: the relation between clients and patrons, and the PRI is the well-oiled machine in this bunch, although not the only one. A governor or a party with the resources can still ask their operators in unions, agricultural organizations, neighborhoods, informal merchants, street vendors, and taxi drivers etc. to deliver their votes to whom he wishes. [MV Note: Over fifty percent of Mexicans are poor. Sixty percent of Mexican workers work "informally", i.e. for cash, with no legal status or rights to benefits. Hence, they are vulnerable to political manipulation in exchange for some immediate financial benefit.]

 Epilogue

The bulk of Delgado's work focuses on showing the various ways in which Calderón paid for the votes that Peña Nieto delivered in 2006, one of which was his lack of support in 2012 for the candidate from his own party, Josefina Vázquez Mota, and putting a stop to anti-Peña Nieto ads by the PAN when they really started having an impact on public opinion polls ('Peña does not Complete [his promises]'). MV Note: Peña Nieto´s slogan was that he "Completes", i.e. fulfills his promises.

 Conclusion

The PAN-PRI Alliance, which came from the understanding between Diego Fernández de Cevallos [a PAN leader known as "The Boss"] and Carlos Salinas [president, 1988-1994] in order to stop the election of Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas [leftist who broke from the PRI to run independently against Salinas], continued being renewed until at least the 'Pact for Mexico' [agreement created between three major parties for various reforms after the election of Peña Nieto in 2012] and this understanding has proved fatal for the project of Mexican democracy.

Reforma only allows subscribers to access articles online.

Lorenzo Meyer is a political scientist, historian and columnist. He earned the Bachelor's degree and a Ph.D. in International Relations from the College of Mexico and pursued postdoctoral studies in Political Science at the University of Chicago. Author of several important works on Mexico's foreign relations and on the Mexican Revolution, he has also written on the Mexican political system, its authoritarian forms of power and democratization processes of the 20th century. He has taught in Mexico, the USA, Spain and England. He has been a columnist for NOTIMEX, Excelsior and currently Reforma. His most recent book is "Nuestra tragedia persistente: la democracia autoritaria en Mexico" ("Our Persistent Tragedy: Authoritarian Democracy in Mexico"). @DrLorenzoMeyer

 <o:p></o:p>
Rebecca email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-70121792597997842482016-05-18T15:51:00.002-05:002016-05-18T15:51:31.431-05:00Mexico Corruption: Congress Postpones Special Session on Anti-Corruption System Until After State Elections June 5Aristegui Noticias: The chairmen of the Committees for Political Coordination in both houses of Congress agreed to hold a special session from June 13 to 17 to approve a package of reforms, among which are those that create the National Anti-Corruption System. This is despite the constitutional deadline to pass the anti-corruption laws being May 28.

Also, the Senate reforms to regulate the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, the single state police command [replacing municipal police] and the miscellaneous criminal law will be included. Spanish originalReed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-38974413932381364232016-05-18T12:44:00.001-05:002016-05-18T15:34:01.619-05:00Mexican President Peña Nieto Supports Equal MarriageLa Jornada: Alonso Urrutia
Translated by Angela Quick

On the National Day Against Homophobia, President Enrique Peña Nieto announced a series of measures against discrimination on grounds of sexual preference. Noteworthy among these is the initiative to amend article four of the Constitution which would open the door to performing same sex marriages.

"Marriage equality would be made explicit, as already is the case in various states. In our country, people's rights cannot vary from one state to the next,'' he said.

MV Note: Same sex marriages have been legal in Mexico City since 2010 and were supported by a Supreme Court ruling. In 2015, in response to appeals from residents in three states, the First Chamber of the Supreme Court ruled that state civil codes that define marriage as a union between man and woman are unconstitutional because they discriminate against same-sex couples. (The Supreme Court is composed of two Chambers of five judges each, which rule on many cases. The full court, which includes the Court's President, rule on others.)

These opinions were obligatory for the courts, but not for state law or state civil registries. Thus a state civil registry can still refuse to grant same sex couples a marriage license, but the couple can appeal to the courts and the courts must grant them an amparo, an injunction, directing the registry to issue the license. The states were not required by the Supeme Court ruling to change their civil codes that still define marriage as a heterosexual union. Some states did subsequently changed their laws to permit same sex marriages.
In Los Pinos [The Pines, presidential residence and offices], in front of representatives of various organizations claiming the rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community (LGBTI), the President maintained that the initiative is on the same page as the case law recently passed by the Mexican Supreme Court.

''That is to say, that marriages are carried out without discrimination based on ethnic origin, disability, social status, health, religion or sexual preference.''
In addition, Peña Nieto said,

 ''I will send an initiative to Congress to amend the Federal Civil Code to ensure equal marriage, so that it can be carried out without any discrimination among people over the age of 18, in line with the provisions of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents.''
This proposal will also update the language in order to avoid discriminatory expressions which still remain in the Code.

The initiative envisages that the judges of civil registration may issue a new birth certificate recognizing a change in gender identity. He hopes that, if approved, changes in the Federal Civil Code will be replicated in the various states.

As part of the series of actions aimed at inhibiting homophobic practices, the President reported that he would instruct the Secretariat of Government Relations and the Legal Counsel of the Mexican President to conduct an analysis of the laws and regulations of the three levels of government [federal, state and municipal] which still include discriminatory content. This work would be in conjunction with areas of research at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) and the Center for Research and Teaching of Economics (CIDE).

He announced that, on an international level, he will give instructions to the Secretariat of Foreign Affairs for Mexico to join the United Nations Core Group on gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or intersex people, in which 19 countries from different regions are involved.

In support of his initiatives, the President put a filter of the colors of the LGBTI community of on his official Twitter photograph. Spanish Original
Angela Quickhttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-17661317741743831672016-05-18T10:27:00.000-05:002016-05-18T10:27:38.317-05:00Mexican President Peña Nieto: Naked King Dressed in PublicitySinEmbargo: Maite Azuela*
Translated by Amanda Coe

The king makes his way through the crowds sitting in his tricolor carriage [the Party of the Institutional Revolution, PRI, is represented by the three colors of the Mexican flag: red, white and green], a toucan in his left hand [symbol of the Green Ecologist Party, which is an ally of the PRI]. He is convinced that he wears the most luxurious suits in the kingdom, waiting for his followers' cheers. In his anticipation of making his achievements public he does not manage to notice some mocking from those who see what the king cannot: reality.

Yesterday, the newspaper SinEmbargo published a note that, without being news, is newly offensive: "the Presidency and the government Secretariats [departments] spend 11 million pesos [US$598,000] on advertising per day in 2015." The year added up to just over 4 billion pesos [US$218 million]. The premises on which the federal government decides to prioritize this expenditure, while marginalizing social investment, are completely wrong if they are looking to increase the President's approval rating or the credibility of the ruling parties.

Peña Nieto's popularity has been in obvious decline following the first two years of his term. Now his approval rating is the lowest it has ever been. According to the latest survey from the newspaper Reforma, 66% of Mexicans disapprove of his work. If we consider previous survey data, the President's approval rating has dropped 9 points. He pays for each piece of fabric that doesn't cover him. His little suit has cost 446 million pesos [US$24.3 million] for each point that his popularity has deteriorated.

According to the latest report from the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Mexico is one of the Latin American countries where poverty has grown the most. Numbers do not lie: in 2014, the percentage of poor people in our country reached 51.6%; in 2015, it increased to 53.2%, especially affecting the more indigenous regions.

If federal and state governments completely stopped spending on advertising in order to invest in reducing inequality, perhaps the President's popularity would not be so affected. But it seems that the decision to allocate billions of public funds to advertise government programs doesn't take into account the priority needs and the impact on public approval, but rather other factors that can benefit the private interests of the President and his cabinet.

What is achieved with spot commercial festivals, billboards, paid inserts [in programs] and contracts that consolidate 25% of government advertising resources on the two television networks? Among the many promises on Peña Nieto's long list is a promise to create a regulatory agency for official advertising. As the civil society organization FUNDAR pointed out in its report published last year:

"the main means of indirect censorship in Mexico remains the discretionary allocation of official advertising in the media."
The financial dependence of most big media outlets allows governments, as advertising clients, to condition their contracts in exchange for silencing critical voices. The media then turns to "administrative reasons" to dismiss journalists or analysts who have troubled the government or those who may jeopardize any lucrative contract that requires public investment.

The opacity in which expenses on governmental advertisements are kept is equally a mockery. Perhaps it is the gains derived from these contracts that support the decisions of government social communication offices to approve such overspending. Perhaps, if the Televisa offered the Green Party a package of spot commercials that did not exceed 35,000 pesos [US$1,900] per showing, why is it that the government is willing to pay 7 million pesos [US$380,000] for a spot commercial for the Government's Third Annual Report campaign? Its administrative efficiency is as reprehensible as its popularity. Unless by their own standards, the gains from their decisions aren't for public benefit. As long as this represents a profit to them, it makes little difference whether advertising is seen as an absurd expense.

Does anything come from mocking the king while he parades in imaginary suits? Will we put an end to the tailors who make these opulent advertising outfits, when in reality the person really laughing at us is the king? Spanish Original

*Maite Azuela has a Masters in Public Policy from the Concordia University, Canada. She has been on the staff of the Federal Electoral Institute, the Electoral Institute of the Federal District (Mexico City) and the Federal Institute for Access to Information. She is the director and political analyst for Dejemos de Hacernos Pendejos (Let's Stop Making Ourselves Jerks) and a columnist for La Silla Rota (The Broken Chair, reference to the Presidential Chair, or Throne). She is a political activist and member of the National Citizen Assembly.Amanda Coehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-66344107762421595272016-05-17T10:41:00.000-05:002016-05-17T10:42:21.932-05:00Mexico-Tlatlaya: Survivors of Massacre Fear Reprisals from Released SoldiersLa Jornada: José Antonio Román

After the court order to release the last three soldiers involved in the executions in Tlatlaya, State of Mexico, Clara Gómez González, a survivor of the events and a protected witness, expresses fear of reprisals that she and her family may become victims of these soldiers.

MV Note: On June 30, 2014, soldiers killed twenty-two civilians, suspected criminals, in a warehouse in Tlatlaya, State of Mexico. The army report said the soldiers had been fired on while on patrol. Journalistic investigations revealed that the soldiers had initiated the attack on the warehouse and when the civilians surrendered, eleven to fifteen survivors were evidently summarily executed and the scene modified to make it look like they had died in the fire fight.
Interviewed in the Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez Human Rights Center [in Mexico City], the organization that advises and represents Gomez Gonzalez, mother of Erika, one of the youth killed in the warehouse in the community of San Pedro Limon, municipality of Tlatlaya, says that, together with the fear, "there is also a feeling of great impotence and much rage." But she anticipates that she will not relent in her pursuit of justice, either here or by going to international human rights organizations.

She affirms that the day of the incident, the morning of June 30, 2014, most of the people who were there had actually surrendered to the Army soldiers, but the soldiers killed them. Clara Gomez, who at the beginning of the process, for security measures adopted the name Julia, says:

"So, there is no case. First, the government tells me to bring charges, but for what? Why then let them go free and I'm more afraid than before? I am afraid for myself and my children. More difficult things are coming. We are seeing a very corrupt government."
Several national and foreign NGOs have emphatically rejected the judicial decision of the Mexican state to release the eight soldiers who were being prosecuted for violations of human rights. They note that, with this decision, the Tlatlaya case, one of the most serious abuses by the military against civilians since former President Felipe Calderon involved the armed forces in the fight against drug trafficking, is heading towards impunity.

Last Friday the sixth panel of judges of the Second Circuit Court acquitted and ordered the release of soldiers Fernando Quintero Millan, Roberto Acevedo Lopez and Leobardo Hernandez Leonides, who faced charges for the crimes of homicide, coverup and illicit modification of evidence of a crime. In making this decision, the court dismissed the evidence provided by the Federal Public Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the three soldiers.

The five other sodiers that were charged were released last October. So, today, there is no one accused in this case, in which at least 15 of the 22 civilians were executed, according to the CNDH [National Human Rights Commission]. Spanish originalReed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-79435336252517960232016-05-16T15:09:00.001-05:002016-05-16T15:09:13.818-05:00Mexico Government's Failures to Provide Justice Require SOS for International Intervention Reforma: Denise Dresser
Translated by Ruby Izar-Shea

Help. Help. Help. SOS. Mexico needs international aid and urgently. It's increasingly obvious that we can't do it alone, don't want to do it alone. Alone we just pretend to fight corruption and impunity and don't really do it. A review of last week's events shows it. Inexplicable decisions that exonerate the guilty. Unintelligible delays that slow the fight against the corrupt. Unbelievable announcements that put in doubt the professionalism, autonomy and capacity of institutions to investigate corrosive cases. Every day that passes it becomes clearer. The Mexican State is unable to investigate or limit or punish itself. It acts as if it wants to, but doesn't. The ship is sinking and, like the Titanic, the crewmen are busying themselves rearranging the chairs on the deck.

Let's review. In recent days we witnessed the reappearance and "human rights" speeches of Thomas Zerón, the PGR official [head of Criminal Investigation Agency of the Attorney General's Office] whose explanation about clandestine errands in the San Juan river was refuted by the UN, the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team and the IGIE [Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts]. In recent days we saw how Army soldiers involved in the Tlatlaya extrajudicial executions were released.

In recent days we were forced to listen to a speech by Virgilio Andrade [Secretary of Public Administration] at an anticorruption summit [in London] about the international recognition Mexico has received for its fight against corruption. In recent days we saw how the political parties blamed each other for not approving the National Anti-Corruption System and the 3of3 Law [that Public Officials and candidates make public their tax returns and statements of assets and investments], when only 17 of 128 senators have submitted their own statements.

And the iceberg we continue to crash against, but which the authorities refuse to recognize: Ayotzinapa unresolved. Ayotzinapa without investigations that should continue according to the 20 recommendations the IGIE left behind. Ayotzinapa, which the Peña Nieto government would rather ignore despite the deadly crack it caused on the ship of his government. A crack it's now trying to plug through the Judiciary when two courts determined, also this week, that the 43 students were not victims of "forced disappearance", but "murder". [MV Note: The judges determined that charges of forced disappearance could not be brought against those arrested as, according to the government case, the students had not been held against their will for an extended period of time, one of the criteria for charges of forced disappearance, but had been murdered soon after they were seized.]

And in doing so, they are desperately trying to prop up the "historical truth" the PGR is determined to make us believe. That story, already refuted by all international bodies involved, saying the students were burned in the Cocula garbage dump. That story, not supported by scientific evidence, that puts all the blame on organized crime members and not on State agents present and involved that night: the Huitzuco police. the Iguala police. the federal police. the 27 Army Battalion.

It's time to recognize that impunity and corruption will not end in Mexico without external support. Hence the urgency to apply a mechanism like the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala. Hence the imperative of creating a partnership between civil society, the reformed parts of the State, if they exist, and the international community. To prosecute the corrupt who are protected instead of persecuted in Mexico. To punish violations of human rights that are ignored instead of investigated in Mexico. To combat impunity that's not an "isolated incident" in Mexico, but rather something that occurs in 99 percent of cases.

We are in urgent need of truth, justice, the rule of law, institutional remodeling, and those who should provide it are all too busy hindering it. Welcome then to international cooperation, technical assistance, promotion of criminal prosecution, initiation of legal proceedings, removal of politicians colluding with crime. Welcome to a way to touch the untouchables.

 SOS is a signal in Morse code that means danger. And the danger Mexico is now facing is a corrupt State, a State characterized by justice and security institutions too weak or infiltrated. A dysfunctional and, in many instances, ineffective State. What we need to do then, is rescue the State so it can fulfill its fundamental responsibilities. And that can't happen going the domestic route alone, due to the lack of political will of a government that would rather maintain the status quo. SOS means "Save Our Ship". We must ask the international community to save our ship. Let's save it.

Reforma only allows subscribers to access its articles online.

*Denise Dresser is a Mexican political analyst, writer, and university professor. After completing undergraduate work at The College of Mexico, she earned her Ph.D. in Politics at Princeton University. She is currently a faculty member in the Department of Political Science at the Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM), where she teaches courses such as Comparative Politics, Political Economy and Contemporary Mexican Politics. She has taught at Georgetown University and the University of California. In December 2015, she was decorated as a Knight of the Legion of Honor by the French government. Twitter: @DeniseDresserG
<o:p></o:p>

Reed Brundagehttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-61950522608980134452016-05-15T19:42:00.004-05:002016-05-15T19:52:33.134-05:00Mexico Justice System: Judicial Reform Without Reforming   Reforma: Ana Laura Magaloni Kerpel

Translated by: Joel Cloke

President Peña Nieto started his administration carrying the weight of what his predecessor did not do: make and execute a plan of action for the implementation of the criminal justice reform. This reform had been approved in 2008 and it had a constitutional deadline of 8 years to become reality throughout the country.

MV Note: The reform changes the criminal justice system from a inquisitorial one, in which prosecution and defense submit written documents on the evidence to a judge who decides in private the innocence or guilt of the accused, to a system of public, oral, adversarial trials before a judge in which evidence is directly presented and challenged and witnesses testify and are cross examined.
However, at the beginning of Peña Nieto's administration, only 3 years away from the constitutional deadline expiring, the criminal justice reform had almost been abandoned: there was nothing done at the federal level and at the local level only a few states had begun their respective processes of implementation. It was clear that a reform of this calibre was not going to be implemented in the deadline that the constitution marks.

In the months before Peña Nieto assumed office, some of his transition team members invited me to speak about the topic. I tried to convince them that the most reasonable bet would be to implement the criminal justice reform in exemplary fashion in five states, as much at the federal level as the local level. States could be picked, for example, that had already started their implementation process and that, with the leadership and the federal government's budgetary support, could study and complete each and every one of the complex institutional changes that this reform entails. In that scenario were Baja California, Nuevo León, Chihuahua the State of Mexico.

My argument was that it had to be demonstrated, through the facts, that the reform was possible and that it was going to help build a trustworthy prosecution and criminal procedure system that was truly for the people. It would allow, in its time, for the constitutional deadline to be extended in order for it to be able to include the whole country. The other option, that is to say, was to carry out an implementation for appearance's sake in all the states at the same time, which was going to bring about the worst of outcomes: reforming so that everything would remain the same. None of those present agreed with my proposal. The then elected president wanted a total implementation process at the federal level and to make it easy, in whatever way possible, for the local reforms, and no one was willing to warn him about the risks and costs that came with it.

Today we find ourselves one month away from the constitutional deadline expiring and it's fitting to ask ourselves about the outcome of having opted for an implementation for appearance's sake. The best diagnosis that exists was made by CIDAC [Center for Research on Development] and it can be seen on their website. The results were predictable. According to the report from CIDAC:

"The actions for the country-wide implementation were carried out in an isolated and uncoordinated manner," which "led to 33 parallel but disjointed transformation processes, taking place as much in the states as in the federal government, which inevitably will impact the operation and the results of the criminal justice system".
According to this report, some states are more advanced than others, but none of them fulfill the standards of a complete and transformative criminal justice reform. The federal level reform does not fulfill them either. Said like this, the real implementation of the criminal justice reform will continue to be a pending assignment and three billion pesos [US$165 million] have already been spent.

The political opportunity for the existence of a real and systemic transformation of the Mexican criminal justice system was lost. What has been done until now has not even helped to prevent the authoritarian practice in the prosecution of justice which was, by far, the key to reforming. Every day the national press reports it: torture as a investigation method, the corruption of the investigative police and prosecutors, the prosecutor's contempt towards families looking for their children, the lack of ability to professionally investigate crimes, the resistance against recording cases that involve the elite, and the large etc. that we all know.

Citizen's demand for a genuine criminal justice reform is always present, but it doesn't seem attractive politically to deal with it. The most relevant question is why? "Who wins with the status quo?"

Reforma only allows subscribers to access its articles online.

*Ana Laura Magaloni Kerpel, Doctorate in Law, Autonomous University of Madrid (Spain); Research Professor, National System of Researchers at Center for Research and Economic Teaching (CIDE). Research Areas: Supreme Court and Comparative Constitutional Justice; Empirical Studies of Institutions of Justice; Institutions of Prosecution and Enforcement of Justice.

Joelhttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-29303639729271643172016-05-14T11:02:00.001-05:002016-05-14T11:02:52.223-05:00Mexico-Tlatlaya: Last Three Arrested Soldiers Freed of Murder ChargesLa Jornada: Gustavo Castillo

The last three of the eight soldiers charged with the death of 22 people in a warehouse in Tlatlaya, State of Mexico, on June 30, 2014, were ordered released by a judge of the second circuit court. The Public Ministry [Prosecutor's Office] had said it believed it had offered enough evidence to prosecute the three soldiers. However, the court ruled that Fernando Quintero Millan, Roberto Acevedo Lopez and Leobardo Hernandez Leónides are innocent of the crimes of homicide, concealment of a crime by alteration of the scene and illegal modification of traces of the crime.

MV Note: On June 30, 2014, soldiers killed twenty-two civilians, suspected criminals, in a warehouse in Tlatlaya, State of Mexico. The army report said the soldiers had been fired on while on patrol. Journalistic investigations revealed that the soldiers had initiated the attack on the warehouse and when the civilians surrendered, they were evidently summarily executed and the scene modified to make it look like they had died in the fire fight.
In March, lawyers from the Miguel Agustin Pro Human Rights Centre, representing survivors of the shooting, reported that a military judge had acquitted the three of military offenses in the case. They had been charged with breach of military duties.

In October of 2015, a federal court released five of the eight who had been accused, although according to the investigation conducted by the Attorney General's Office (PGR) at least nine people out of a total of 22 who were killed had been executed. Investigations by the National Commission for Human Rights concluded that 15 of the victims have been killed in cold blood [after they had surrendered]. Spanish originalReed Brundagehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-37688688669625363562016-05-13T18:24:00.001-05:002016-05-13T18:33:02.584-05:00Mexico-Ayotzinapa: Justice Official, Tomás Zerón, Remains on Job Despite Revelations of Torture of SuspectsReforma: Carmen Aristegui F.*
Translated by Marc McPherson

This week, the Associated Press released documents and testimonies which reveal the alleged practice of torture and inducement of the statements upon which the "historic truth" was founded in the Ayotzinapa case.

There is an entire compendium detailing the circumstances under which the main witnesses and defendants in the case surrounding the disappearance of 43 Ayotzinapa normal school students between the 26th and 27th September 2014 made their formal statements to the investigative police.

According to Associated Press, the statements all went down a similar path:

"They were first questioned, followed by punches, electric shocks and partial asphyxiations with plastic bags; finally, the threats to kill their loved ones unless they confessed to stories that backed up the government's line."
It is not the first time that there are references to the use of torture to obtain admissions from detainees in the case. The recently disbanded IGIE [Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts] also noticed it in reports and declarations backed up by medical reports to accredit them.

Included are the key characters in the official investigation: Agustín García Reyes, Patricio Reyes Landa, and Sidronio Casarrubias. Allegedly, all of them are linked to organized crime.

According to the documents published by Associated Press, Reyes Landa told a judge:

"A person came up and took off my blindfold and showed me a photo of my family — my two daughters, my wife and my brother," he said. "He said if I didn't do everything they told me to, they were going to rape my daughters. ... I told them I was going to do everything they asked."

This testimony is particularly significant, because Reyes Landa was one of those who claimed to have killed the students, burning their bodies and dumping the remains in the San Juan River.

Suffocating with bags, electric shocks, and rape with the use of metal objects is what is chronicled by Casarrubias, who during his statement, pointed directly at an investigation agent who goes by the name Gabriel Valle, whom he accused of threatening him and his family with torture, if he did not say what he had been told to say. García Reyes' statement is practically identical.

The distortion that is introduced into the legal proceedings when torture is resorted to is so serious that it closes, at times for ever, the possibility of knowing what really happened in cases like this.

Of what does the Ayotzinapa case consist if not principally of confessions? After all of this, we should be seeing the formal opening of an "investigation of the investigations". Instead, we see those involved from the very beginning in such a questionable and twisted process remaining as key components in the Attorney General's office.

Two weeks ago, this column started with the following paragraph:

"If at the time of publication of this article, Friday morning, Mr. Tomás Zerón Lucio has not resigned or been removed from office, we will be made to know, more forcefully than ever, that the government of Peña Nieto is unsalvageable, that it does not appear to have a remedy and that Mexico will enter a path of major confrontations. If something so elemental has not happened by then, the distance between the government and society will be unbridgeable."
The IGIE had just released a video recorded [October 28, 2014] the day before the search [October 29, 2014] where, according the official version of events, bags were found in the San Juan River with, allegedly, remains of the youths. The scandal was huge. Zerón reacted and was contradicted by the IGIE, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Argentine Forensic Team.

He did not resign. He was not investigated. Nothing happened. A week and a half after that video, the files were revealed by AP, 10 in total, in which there was consistent demonstrations of "credible evidence of torture", upon which the "historic truth" is based. Tomás Zerón, the fireproof official, continues in his job.

Reforma only allows subscribers to access its articles online.

*Carmen Aristegui F. is a journalist. A graduate of the UNAM, she is a radio and TV host and commentator. A lecturer and author of books, she has been awarded the National Journalism Award, the Iberoamerican Prize, the Maria Moors Cabot Prize, and the Order of the Legion of Honor by the French Government. She is a Reforma columnist and moderator of the program "Aristegui" on CNN in Spanish. She directs the web portal Aristegui News. Until early March 2015, she was director of the First Edition (morning program) of MVS News (radio). She and her investigative team were fired for unclear reasons after they had exposed the purchase of the "White House" of President Peña Nieto's wife, Angélica Rivera, from the Higa Group, a major government contractor.
Reed Brundagehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-23344224520906940332016-05-13T17:26:00.000-05:002016-05-13T17:42:26.893-05:00Mexico Police Score Near Bottom in International EvaluationAnimal Político: Ernesto López Portillo*

Translated by Leslie Castillo Navia

In 1994, we recommended "not more, but better police". They gave us more and worse. They succeeded; they led Mexican police to the lowest level of legitimacy worldwide. A new comparative study puts Mexico, along with Kenya, Nigeria, Congo and Pakistan, as having the worst police performance worldwide in terms of legitimacy. According to the report, "the purpose of the legitimacy domain is to measure whether the police and security services act in the best interest of the country and its citizens, measured by both expert assessment and by citizen perceptions."

The World Internal Security and Police Index (WISPI) was published for the first time. The new global study adds to the Global Peace Index (GPI) and the Fragile States Index (FSI). The report just released explains that, while previously available indices record levels like murder, terrorism and violent crime, they do not measure the ability of security services. With the publication of the WISPI, there is now a composite index that measures internal security from a holistic perspective and includes public perception regarding the police and security, levels of safety provided, and size of police force necessary to provide the service.

In addition to legitimacy, the WISPI measures three other categories: capacity (resources devoted to security), effectiveness (quality control of police service, criminal justice, and corruption control) and outcomes (level of threats to internal security). Mexico is located 118th of 127 countries assessed. For example, we are eleven places below Guatemala, nineteen behind Nicaragua and thirty-nine trailing behind Ecuador. The only countries that appear below Mexico are Venezuela, Cameroon, Bangladesh, Mozambique, Pakistan, Uganda, Congo and Nigeria.

The issue is even worse, if such a thing is possible. Mexico not only has one of the world's least reliable police forces, but also appears on a reduced list of only six countries that at least doubled the size of their police forces in the past thirty years (Venezuela, Cameroon, Bangladesh, Nigeria and Singapore) according to the WISPI.

The news comes after two decades of operation of a National Public Security System which promised the professionalization of police forces and failed, just as all the presidents in Mexico's history have done, and exactly as everyone seeking the vote in electoral contests are doing. Police professionalization is a lie as big as the country, which now puts us in a position of worldwide embarrassment.

What a nightmare our country is in with regard to public responsibility. It is impossible to build reliable police forces where politics and trust are in parallel. I've already written it: every day that the Mexican political system weakens the police force, it strengthens the military pathway of security. In 1994, we recommended "not more, but better police". They gave us more and worse. We have been taken to the basement of the world. There is nothing more to add. Spanish original

*Ernesto López Portillo is founder and director of Insyde, the Institute for Security and Democracy, a multi-disciplinary research organization dedicated to analyzing the structural lacks and weaknesses of Mexican government institutions related to security and human rights. A lawyer by training, he is considered a leading Mexican expert on security and human rights issues. @ErnestoLPV
Leslie Castillo Naviahttps://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-54495850215149610562016-05-12T14:53:00.001-05:002016-05-12T15:46:19.246-05:00Mexico Corruption: Real Anticorruption System Needed to Improve National "Mood"SinEmbargo: Adrián López Ortiz*
Translated by: Alexander Graham

During his term, Enrique Peña Nieto has committed some serious errors in discourse. His stumble at the Guadalajara Book Fair, for example [asked by the press to name three books that had influenced him, Peña Nieto could name none] will go down in history. But saying that Mexico is in "a bad mood" is not one of them: the President truly believes it, and that is dangerous [recently Peña Nieto explained citizens' "bad mood" as being due to some articles and columns in the press].

It is dangerous because it shows us, in only one sentence, what is and what will be the focus of his administration from now up until he leaves.

The strategy will be to, well, carry on the same. The "I'm right and that's that" standpoint firmly established among our leaders is evidenced when they make decisions and stick to them, pushing criticisms and suggestions aside. That is not governing, it is imposition.

We saw it in ex-President Vicente Calderón's "strategy" against organized crime. And now we're seeing it again in a reformist agenda from a President who strongly believes that changing the Constitution is enough to change the country.

I'm not saying the reforms are bad, in of themselves. However, it is obvious that bringing them to a reality involves much more than just changing the law. It entails explicit and clear-cut secondary legislation; monitoring and control procedures; regulatory frameworks that reward adherence and punish non-compliance. Institutions with sufficient authorization to carry out their duties.

In short, a reliable and trustworthy institutional arrangement that benefits citizens. That is what's missing, everything else is superfluous.

The general assessment is conclusive: it is the corruption and impunity of our rule of law that is hurting us. So it should come as no surprise that the Mexico Democratic Development Index 2015 (IDD-Mex 2015) presented this week by Coparmex, consultant company Politat, and the Konrad Adenauer Foundation warned that: "the greatest failing of Mexican democracy" is the social wellbeing of its people.

According to SinEmbargo, Gustavo de Hoyos, National President of Coparmex, expressed worry that, for the second consecutive year, another democratic regression can be seen in Mexico: unemployment, poverty, the health system and the low level of education.

It makes perfectly good sense that, while the politico-business elite revel in absolute impunity, most of the population are left on the sidelines of progress, condemned to social and economic hardships. It is plain to see: our political class legislates and governs to protect and benefit themselves, all while pretending to listen to the citizens who elected them.

To give an example: the discussion of the 3of3 Law [initiative presented by citizens requiring office holders and candidates make public their tax returns and statements of assets and investments.] in the Senate is a clear instance of how the partyocracy resists to the end implementing a progressive legislation to fight against corruption. No one's going to hurt them in their wallets like that...

We are faced with an arrangement that only works selectively: only a few-very few-reap the rewards, while many more are left adrift, forgotten.

The contradiction is a bitter pill to swallow: those who can, do not, and we who want to, cannot. And as we as citizens do not have functional mechanisms to modify the foundations of the system, we take to social networks and the media to put forth our criticisms. We are those who are in "a bad mood".

We all know what follows in this kind of situation: when the "system" does not work, you replace it. This must be done before it collapses ... because it will. Mexico cannot continue pretending before the eyes of the world. There is no way of reconciling the two countries we have become without one eating the other. On the one hand we have the energy, tourism, and automotive potential; and on the other deep inequality, corruption, impunity, and stark violence.

Let us not forget that democracies are not perfect. We have to ask the uncomfortable question: do we want to become a second Venezuela?

In these types of processes, sooner or later definitions must be laid down. The discussion in the Senate is a key moment. What is at stake here is the will of a people represented by thousands of signatures against the cynical resistance of a political class that wishes to continue on the same. Our politicians should think carefully about the consequences of stomping on us again.

The President would do well to publicly ask his parties [Party of the Institutional Revolution, PRI, and its ally, Green Ecologist Party] in the Senate that the 3for3 Law and the National Anticorruption System are handled correctly. The message would be important, but the outcome, even more so: a genuine, comprehensive system to combat corruption.

Constitutional amendments establishing a formal Anti-corruption System were passed last year and approved by a majority of the thirty-two state legislatures. A deadline of one year, May 28, 2016, was set for passing the secondary legislation to specify the agencies and rules for its implementation. During the session that began in January and ended on April 30, the Congress drafted a group of such "secondary laws". It adjourned without passing any of them. Congressional committess are working on the laws this week and will likely convene a special session to vote on them.
Such a system would be a huge step forward in improving the conduct of a corrupt and corrupting political class. I implore it be done, if only to improve our mood... Spanish Original

*Adrián López Ortiz is an engineer and teacher of humanistic studies with a concentration in applied ethics at the Tec de Monterrey. Since 2012 he has been the Director General of Northwest Newspapers in Sinaloa. He is the author of "A Country without Peace" and "Attempt at Provocation" and co-author of "Culture in Sinaloa: Narratives of Society and Violence."Alexander Grahamhttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-31472114648697929552016-05-12T13:35:00.001-05:002016-05-12T13:35:31.368-05:00Mexico-US Relations: Government Urgently Needs "Plan B" to Respond to Donald Trump's Economic ThreatsReforma: Lorenzo Meyer*
Translated by Leslie Castillo Navia

Donald Trump, a public enemy of undocumented Mexicans in the United States, the Mexican government that "dumps their [social] trash on the United States", and NAFTA, is now a presidential candidate in his country. On the other hand, we as Mexicans to the north and south of the Rio Grande just celebrated the 154th anniversary of the victory over the French at Puebla in 1862. This pair of seemingly unconnected situations allows reflection on major decisions of political leadership: the difference implicated by the existence or absence of a "Plan B" when the original plan fails.

Benito Juárez's "Plan B"

In 1863, when they could no longer successfully resist the French onslaught, liberals led by Benito Juárez designed a second plan that succeeded. In contrast, today's neoliberals do not seem to have an alternative if Trump goes as far as to undo NAFTA [North American Free Trade Act].

As we know, in 1862, Juárez and his men were able to repel French invaders in Puebla, but they did not defeat them. Napoleón III's soldiers simply withdrew to Orizaba and, in 1863, they returned reinforced to attack Puebla. After 62 days of hard siege, they took the city and practically put an end to the Republic's army. However, after a while the liberals set a "Plan B" in motion - guerrilla warfare - which the Mexican leadership of 1847 did not want to start after the defeat of the regular army by the United States. Juarism's prolonged resistance, in addition to other factors such as U.S. pressure on France, led to the triumph of liberalism and of the Republic in 1867.

What Neoliberalism Did Not Forsee

Today, the external danger Mexico faces is that which could be generated by a possible United States' presidency headed by Trump. The celebrity can still be defeated by his Democratic opponent, but he is already outlining an eight-year project because he believes he could achieve re-election in 2020. Among the first actions he has in mind are to cancel the executive decrees which currently favor undocumented migrants, design a "Great Wall" along the border with Mexico, and reformulate or abrogate trade treaties like NAFTA.

NAFTA, signed by Carlos Salinas [president, 1988-1994], George H. W. Bush and Brian Mulroney from Canada in December of 1992, was created in an environment of great promises. In Mexico, it was sold as an authentic "national project". However, if Trump obtains power, NAFTA and the Mexican export economy, which is based on it, will simply remain up in the air. For Mexico, so-called "globalization" turned out to not be more than just an "Americanization", because today 80% of its exports have the U.S. market as their destination (INEGI, 2015).

Trump intends not only to reformulate NAFTA and other agreements - an intention affirmed by Roger Stone, one of the members of his inner circle - but he also intends to punish products manufactured in Mexico by U.S. companies like Ford, Nabisco and Carrier with a 35% tariff. The idea is to force them to close their factories in Mexico and bring them back to the United States, where they would pay salaries seven times higher than Mexicans (The New York Times, March 19th and May 4th).

What Must Be Rebuilt

Although Trump could be defeated at the polls in November, the current that he stirred up and mobilized by presenting Mexico and Mexicans as contrary to United States' national interest is already a factor in the relationship between Mexico and the United States. Trumpism brought an element that existed since long ago in U.S. society to the surface, one which had been hidden by choice of the governments of both countries.

In the political-economic cycle that went from Cardenism [President Lázaro Cárdenas, 1934-1940] until the end of José López Portillo's six-year term [1976-82], Mexican elites were committed to maintaining the image of relative independence won by the Mexican Revolution. However, with the consolidation of neoliberalism in the United States and Western Europe, combined with the "mixed economy" crisis in Mexico [mixed economy of State-owned and private businesses], Salinas presided over the abandonment of the domestic market as a center of national productive activity and the State as responsible for the economic and social development of the country.

Since the mid-1980's, politics and economics were modified without social anesthesia to adapt them to the relentless logic of the external market, which in our case was really a U.S. market. Mexican nationalism became a thing of the past, a history irrelevant to and uncomfortable for Mexican political and economic groups that gained power through the 1982 debt crisis [triggered by world recession and rising interest rates on international loans. As part of the agreements to refinance Mexican debt, the U.S. and World Bank required that Mexico privatize many of its State-owned busninesses and elminate subidies to farmers and low-income people.].

What [Mexican leaders] did not want to see in this transformation is that, beyond being the center of neoliberalism or any other ideology, the United States is a great nationalist power which has never renounced that characteristic. What Trump has done today is simply shed light on this nationalism in its protectionist version with xenophobic tinges and isolationist touches, just when Mexico has already broken down almost all of its defenses against an external relationship that historically combines intensity with a strong asymmetry of power.

Because of all of the above, and in Mexico's national interest, a "Plan B" has become necessary and essential - one which very carefully reformulates the definition of the present and future nature of the relationship between Mexico and its complex northern neighbor.

Reforma only allows subscribers to access its articles online.

*Lorenzo Meyer is a political scientist, historian and columnist. He earned the Bachelor's degree and a Ph.D. in International Relations from the College of Mexico and pursued postdoctoral studies in Political Science at the University of Chicago. Author of several important works on Mexico's foreign relations and on the Mexican Revolution, he has also written on the Mexican political system, its authoritarian forms of power and democratization processes of the 20th century. He has taught in Mexico, the USA, Spain and England. He has been a columnist for NOTIMEX, Excelsior and currently Reforma. His most recent book is "Nuestra tragedia persistente: la democracia autoritaria en Mexico" ("Our Persistent Tragedy: Authoritarian Democracy in Mexico"). @DrLorenzoMeyerLeslie Castillo Naviahttps://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-4089285239690517306.post-46002658082899194422016-05-12T11:11:00.001-05:002016-05-12T11:11:35.509-05:00Mexico Displaced Persons: Government Must Address Plight of Victims of Forced Internal Displacement - National Human Rights Commission ReportCNN Expansion: On Wednesday, the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) demanded that measures be taken to assist victims of forced displacement in Mexico, a phenomenon that has not been officially recognized.

MV Note: "...the CNDH regrets that this grave and growing problem is not officially recognized by any government agency, since it is linked to multiple violations of human rights, chiefly among the most vulnerable sectors of the population" [José Antonio Román, CNDH reports at least 35,433 displaced by violence, in La Jornada].

In this regard, the CNDH presented its Special Report on Internal Forced Displacement in Mexico in order to expose and make this phenomenon visible and, thereby, prompt government actions both on behalf of preventing and establishing care guidelines for victims under a humanitarian profile in order return [displaced persons] to their place of origin.

MV Note: "In Mexico, at least 35,433 victims of forced internal displacement, caused mainly by violence and insecurity linked to organized crime, according to data reported by the governments of states and municipalities, as well as the testimonies collected by the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH)" [previously cited, José Antonio Román, La Jornada].

It is necessary that the Mexican government officially recognize the existence of this problem, take an unequivocal position on the same and undertake specific actions to address it, declared National Ombudsman, Luis Raúl González Pérez at a news conference.

González Pérez also indicated that a general law on the subject should be created that establishes the basic legal framework for the distribution and determination of the concurrence of powers and duties of the authorities of the Mexican State on the issue [of internal displacement]. He asserted:

"It is essential that a national and official diagnosis of forced internal displacement in Mexico be developed, as an essential tool for constructing effective public policies and programs, addressing the social, economic, legal and political consequences in the country. In this regard, conducting a census survey that includes forced internal displacement would be of great importance."
González Pérez, who is also president of the CNDH, added:

"Given the nature of the problem, there is no comprehensive, current and verifiable information about the number of victims of forced internal displacement in Mexico; hence, the magnitude and true scope of the problem is still to be investigated."
González Pérez emphasized that although internal forced displacement is not new in Mexico, the CNDH report is the first issued by a State agency on the issue, analyzing its causes, the forms it takes and the principal problems for our country in that both preventive measures and protection of displaced persons are proposed.

The CNDH's Fifth Inspector General, Édgar Corzo Sosa, pointed out that the proposals made in this Special Report are directed at various agencies of the three levels of government related to the issue, including the Secretariats of Government Relations [SEGOB], Social Development [SEDESOL], Labor and Social Welfare [STPS], Public Education [SEP], Health, Congress of the Union, National Institute of Statistics and Geography [INEGI], as well as state governments, state legislatures and municipal governments that are confronting the problem. Proposals include:

Creation of a comprehensive and crosscutting public policy to protect human rights and ensure victims' rights;

Development of protocols for authorities, corporations and federal executive officials;

Generation of actions of coordination between agencies at the three levels of government, international organizations, civil society organizations and private sector.

Spanish original

Jane Brundagehttp://firstname.lastname@example.com