President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador you will no longer be able to mention in your morning lectures Max Kaisera Mexican who defines himself as a “professional citizen provocateur”, who obtained a suspension in an Amparo Trial promoted against the president and his section “Who’s Who in the lies of the week”.
The ruling, delivered by Agustin Tello Espindola, head of the Eleventh District Court in Administrative Matters of Mexico City, orders the head of the federal Executive, and the coordinator of Social Communication of the presidency, Jesus Ramirez Cuevas, refrain from spreading the image of Max Kaiser, and stop “making discriminatory, stigmatizing, unjustified, offensive and excessive statements”.
Kaiser has been reviled more than 20 times in the section “Who’s Who in the lies of the week”, space that -within the presidential conferences- leads every Wednesday Ana Elizabeth Garcia Vilchiswho must also abide by the court order.
By granting the provisional suspension that Kaiser requested, Judge Tello Espíndola warns that the mentions, made from the presidency against this citizen, have an impact “to the detriment of his person and both physical and mental integrity.”
This determination, clarified the gown, does not imply that the section “Who is Who in the lies of the week” will stop broadcasting in the morning conference, but that “in their subsequent broadcasts refrain from issuing opinions” on Max Kaiser.
With this, Kaiser said in an interview with HIGH LEVEL, an important precedent is being set for abuse of power and violation of human rights that is exercised -illegally- from the presidency of Mexico against those citizens and activists whose opinions are not liked in the National Palace.
The morning ones, and especially that section that García Vilchis stars in every Wednesday, “violate human rights, because they stigmatize and try to inhibit freedom of expression”, notes Max Kaiser.
Compliance mandatory?
All suspensions, provisional or final, issued by the federal courts must be compulsorily complied with by the authorities indicated as responsible, since the suspension, as a precautionary measure, is granted to citizens who attend the Amparo Trial so that the effects of the suspensions cease. acts that -preliminarily- are considered infringers of fundamental rights.
In accordance with section III of article 262 of the Amparo Lawthe public servant who “does not obey a suspension order duly notified” commits a crime that is punishable sentenced to three to nine years in prison, a fine of up to 51,870 pesos, and dismissal and disqualification for up to nine years.
In this vein, Max Kaiser doubts that the president and his Social Communication coordinator are going to comply with what the Eleventh District Court ordered in this case, since it is public that the president “has violated all the protections that he has been able to since who is head of government.
However, the objective of this amparo is to get the Federal Judiciary to issue a sentence stating that López Obrador “violates the rights of people with the morning, and especially with that section”, emphasizes Kaiser.
Reply and expression, are they human rights?
Until now, regarding the attacks and insults that the president expresses daily against journalists, activists, lawyers, non-governmental organizations and the media, among others, there are only two protections: that of Max Kaiser and that promoted by the senator Xochitl Galvez.
The also candidate for the presidential candidacy of the opposition already obtained a sentence in her favor from Hugo Roberto Perez Lugo, Second District Judge in Civil Matters of Mexico City, who ordered the president to grant Gálvez his right of reply in the morning conference.
López Obrador has not complied with this sentence, in fact, on June 27, the deputy counselor for constitutional control and litigation of the Legal Department of the Federal Executive already filed an Appeal for Review against the ruling that benefits Xóchitl Gálvez, the which will have to be resolved by a Collegiate Court.
The senator of the National Action Party went under the protection so that the president allows her to clarify that she is not against the social programs of the current administration, nor does she intend to disappear them, as López Obrador stated on December 5, 2022.
In the case of Max Kaiser, the intention is not to silence the president, nor “to cancel the morning” or remove the section “Who’s Who in the lies of the week”, but “make it clear that this section should not exist”since this was designed to “try to instill fear, to try to inhibit freedom of expression,” he says.
Kaiser adds that he decided to promote the amparo because recently, in the penultimate time he was mentioned at the president’s conference, he was accused of belonging to a group “financed by international agencies to hit the current government.”
That was the straw that broke the camel’s back: “It’s one thing to say adjectives to me, and a very different one is to use public power, the platform of public power, to accuse a person of belonging to a group that commits crimes,” he details.
In this regard, preliminarily, the judge Agustin Tello Espindola, agrees with Max Kaiser, because the verbal attacks he has received in the morning endanger his physical and mental integrity against third parties.
The judge is acknowledging that “stigmatizing critics of the government puts us at risk in front of people who agree” with President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
“Calling us a mafia of power, saying that we are enemies of the people and other adjectives, not only stigmatizes us, (also) puts us in danger, because when the President of the Republic says ‘this man is against the people’, the The message that he sends to his followers is: There is the enemy”.
In addition to this protection, which seeks to demonstrate that the head of the federal Executive branch abuses his power, Max Kaiser is already considering filing a civil lawsuit for moral damages, although the most important thing, he says, is that “other people, who did keep silent about be stigmatized, speak again, raise your voice again, and let them see that there is a possible protection so that they can continue to exercise their right to freedom of expression.”
MORE NEWS:
surya palaces Journalist and lawyer, specialist in legal analysis and human rights. She has been a reporter, radio host and editor.