Story Views
Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

Maria Amparo Casar, CIDE researcher, has an interesting suggestion; don't just talk about the Colombian experience; adopt some of the measures the Colombians used used to fight corruption. CIDE (Centro de Investigacion y Docencia Economica; Center for Economics Research and Teaching) is widely considered to be Mexico's most prestigious academic institution in the areas in which it specializes. — un vato  

Distrito Federal.– Uriel Farias Alvarez was elected mayor of Tepalcatepec for the PRI in 2007.  In 2009, he was arrested in the Federal operation known as the “Michoacanazo” in which 36 persons — among them 16 state officials, 11 municipal presidents (mayors) and a judge — were arrested for suspected ties to organized crime.

The operation, a success because of the arrests, ended up being a disaster because of the results. Uriel himself, who was substituted by his wife as mayor, was released less than a year later and resumed the municipal presidency. Today, all 36 are free. We don't know if some of them were unjustly accused, but all of them were set free, not because their innocence was proven, but because of ministerial and judicial incompetence.

“There will not be another 'Michoacanazo'”, declares Secretary Osorio Chong. Hopefully, he's referring to the final failure of that project and not to the philosophy that must have animated it, but which the previous government could not sustain because of inability, weakness, or, even worse, because of political deals: because the Public Ministry did not structure the inquiries adequately, because the judge adopted some procedural legalism, or because there was a political fix.

It is possible that, as the PRI claims, the 2009 “Michoacanazo” was intended to “subdue a political enemy”, and it is said that “when there's an accusation, there must be legal basis in order to act on (that accusation)”. But one would hope that there is a “Michoacanazo” somewhere in the picture in the plan to recover a good portion of the Michoacan territory, in the sense of attacking the problem of collusion between authorities and organized crime.

But no. There isn't. It is surprising that the Michoacan Plan, designed to return public security to the state, contains only measures dealing with the state's social and economic development.  Not because it is not important to promote employment, education, culture, health and infrastructure, but because none of these will work without an effective rule of law, something that has not existed in that state for a long time.  And the rule of law cannot exist if those in charge of making it work are submissive to, or part of, organized crime.  Neither public strength nor a 45 billion peso checkbook will be enough.

In the strategy for regaining Michoacan there has been much talk of the Colombian experience, but very little has been adopted from that country's long struggle against the drug lords. Particularly the measures aimed at combating political and administrative corruption.

In the Anti-corruption Plan that was part of its strategy, Colombia began by admitting the complicity between politics and organized crime, and the takeover of the structures of government, including  local and federal (governments), the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Powers, and the electoral process.

The plan had several measures, including the creation of anti-corruption councils controlled by citizens;  a model for the investigation of corrupt practices;  background checks of all candidates that wanted to compete in elections; scrutiny of campaign finances;  training courses for local governments and a reform (that allowed) intervention in municipal administrations.

And it wasn't just talk; the Anti-corruption Plan ended up prosecuting more than 60 legislators whose parliamentary immunity was removed and more than 40 state and local government officials for ties to organized crime. There was even an arrest warrant issued for the former President of the Congress himself.

A strategy like this requires, first of all, an admission that little can be done without cleaning up the structures of government. It also requires an admission that ties to organized crime are equally present in the governments of all political parties.  Today, as in the 2009 “Michoacanazo”, governors, former governors and officials from the PRI and the PRD parties, and mayors and legislators from the three political parties are being accused. Finally, it requires a pact between all members of the political class that all of them will be investigated, including looking into their political trajectories as well as into the origin and destination of their financial resources. Without these three requirements, Commissioner (Castillo's) actions, the deployment of government forces, and the resources destined for social and economic development will not do much good.

There are no signs that this is in the Mexican government's plans.  Instead of investigations and prosecutions by law enforcement agencies and justice departments of authorities linked with organized crime, what we see are self defense forces removing or displacing mayors or, at best, the federal government substituting the functions of state and local authorities without even investigating their history. Osorio Chong says that there has been no progress in the proceedings because they don't have the evidence to accuse anybody. The answer is simple: there will be no evidence if there isn't an agreement to investigate everyone, without exception, with or without indications.  

Diario.com.mx