On August 9th, after almost 30 years in prison, Rafael Caro Quintero abandoned – under the protection of a court order – the Puente Grande detention facility, in Jalisco. The release of the most influent Mexican druglord in the 1980s decade has created a collective outrage in the population. His release, in addition to several recent court decisions (among them, the absolution of Raúl Salinas on his charges of illegal enrichment or the release of Florence Cassez ), feeds the distrust environment regarding justice procurement in Mexico. And, of course, it is no surprise at all.
The Caro Quintero process was a typical case of Mexican justice: a quarter of a century to solve its responsibility in the murder of U.S. agent Enrique Camarena. Apprehended in 1985, it was until 2009 when a court decided its culpability for the aforementioned crime. The slow and defficient work made by the justice procurement system, starting with the dreadful exercise of public prosecutors, ended in creating the necessary elements for the defense to present an amparo (protection) arguing the incompetency of the judge on the case. The amparo was conceded and with the excuse of complying with the sentences of his other crimes, the judge decided to order his release. What is truly worrisome, beyond the mistake made by the authorities 30 years ago (exercising legal action on federal crime basis, instead of ordinary courts), is that these errors keep repeating themselves nowadays. Almost three decades later, there are no evidence of a substantial improvement in the operations of public prosecutor’s offices, the key issue in Mexican justice today. Likewise, it is also important to highlight that, although the amparo resolution is correct, the decision to release Quintero is not. Instead of that, the judge had the opportunity to send the case to the due tribunal in order to inform about it. Why release him and not order the process´ replenishment? Suspicions are quite justified on that regard. Besides, where is the appeal of the General Attorney’s Office?
Beyond legal issues, the release of Caro Quintero also produced political reactions; among them, the explicit disapproval of the American government. It is worth remembering that, dealing with the muder of an American agent and given the accused’s importance, the current government was quite interested on the matter. Extradition was requested but denied. Now, it has expressed its concern for possible consequences of the release in the dynamics of organized crime, and it has expressed the need to start an investigation that might determine a new apprehensal (if he ever appears again, that is). All of this is produced within a context of separation between Mexican and American governments on issues related with security and drug trafficking (at least compared by the closeness during the past administration). But the deep-lying issue transcends all other foreign policy matters, ever since both governments have the same objective of strenghtening justice in Mexico. The problem is that given the weakness of the Public Attorney’s Office, all “justice” within the past two decades seems to be at stake with the aforementioned cases and, potentially, with the overwhelming majority of those currently in prison. Not that they are innocent: the problem is that a combination of an abysmal justice procurement system with a weak justice power but more and more independent may end up being lethal.
It is worth underlining the possibility that, given this release, the concept of due process will be once again attacked. Those who despise it will blame it for allowing the release of those accused (a comprehensive view when considering that it only seems to favor those involved in controversial and publicized cases), but it exhibits a misunderstanding over the intention of the concept, which seeks the protection of innocents rather than the release of criminals. However, it is also true that due process will remain as a naive illusion while the legal system keeps carrying on the same vices. In the Quintero case, it is outrageous that the release was made by a stupid mistake made by the Public Attorney’s Office. The case of the “druglord of druglords” is another golden star for the justice procurement system, which lies upon the dilemma of improving its performance or understanding the discredit it has justifiably acquired.
CIDAC
Comments