We have seen with surprise, throughout this administration, actions and challenges that disqualify and question the highest court in the nation. These are no longer just expressions, but actions that, directly, disrespect; They are insubordinate and rebel against what was decided by those who make up the plenary session of the SCJN. Sometimes, by failing to do things, or, arrogantly, reiterating decisions, as well as using mechanisms, instruments or regulations that, in any case, are equivalent to what was judicially disapproved. Yes, there is a stubborn and contumacious rebellion to what is resolved.
The Constitution is clear and precise, stating that the supreme power of the Federation is divided, for its exercise, into three, assigning tasks to each of the powers, which, following the French tradition, have governed the country since the century XIX. Going over the founding agreement, the presidential speech objects, questions and disapproves of the work of those entrusted by the constituent to define what adheres, or does not, to the constitutional text, assuming, categorically, that the goals set by the movement led by the man from Tabasco, are not only unobjectionable and unquestionable, but also cannot be postponed. The president not only expects, but demands, that the actions of the ministers promote and advance the evil objectives that he has set.
The confrontation has overwhelmed the powers, the narrative articulated by the Federal Executive has permeated its collaborators, as well as the official legislators, who not only criticize and belittle the jurisdictional work of the Federal Judiciary, but are already manifesting themselves openly. in disregard of what was ordered, as has recently happened in the Senate of the Republic, in the case of the appointment of members of the governing body of the INAI.
Although García Luna has already been arrested by a foreign authority, being subject to jurisdiction and sentenced there, the FGR intends to pursue the one who is no longer fleeing, so that he may be summarily sentenced here. Yes, he has started a brave crusade against someone whose hands will be tied for a long time. Unfortunately for him, they have not even been able to match the cards. Given the insubstantiality of the accusation made, based on statements and newspaper clippings, the judges have had no choice but to dismiss the fanciful accusations that, although it is true, could have some semblance of truth, these attempt to take hold, naively, of the criminal condition accredited by others, that is, they proceed on the assumption that criminal status mechanically leads to convictions, without observing due process of law. Five years have passed, and there is not a single relevant ruling, handed down after a trial, regarding corruption or preservation of national heritage.
So the Federal Executive, its agencies and other auxiliaries only accept and recognize the sentences that favor and accommodate them, placing those that do not do so in the realm of criminality. It is openly said, in the official narrative, that the power that settles controversies of all kinds is captured by small groups that manipulate the law at their discretion, resulting, according to the head of the government, in a state agent of zero credibility.
By expressing itself in this way about the complex apparatus that administers justice at the federal level, it calls into question the reliability and respectability of the sentences, since the accusation is not limited to isolated decisions. The clear tenor of the considerations expressed in the presidential pulpit is intended to disqualify character; honesty and rectitude of the judges, and not issues or circumstances, such as isolated cases. It denounces and exposes, individually and for various reasons, those who decide, at the highest level, the controversies and disputes that arise in national territory.
The dogmatic part of the Constitution, that which contains individual guarantees, with an annulled guarantor, is a dead letter.
This week the head of the Federal Executive has mocked and mocked the decisions of the INE. Once the tone and route have been set, it will not take long for the parties and anyone who has any interest in the electoral processes to come to follow. He not only omits, but before failing to comply with what was ordered, he has mocked the constitutional person responsible for ensuring equity in electoral processes. The contempt has taken on the appearance of disqualification, a glove that crosses the referee’s cheek, waiting for him to turn the other.