On March 13, the Mexican National Commission of Human Rights (CNDH) submitted a detailed report on illegal practices made by 21 former officials during the December 2005 arrest of French citizen Florence Cassez and her subsequent staged television raid. The head of the Commission, Raul Plascencia, had announced the possibility of filing a legal complaint based on the report’s content. This came true on Friday, 15 March, when the aforementioned report was presented to the Attorney’s General Office (PGR), which constituted a criminal complaint against those involved in the famous Cassez case. The proceeding, responding to social demands required by the investigation of people responsible for the irregularities surrounding the liberation of Cassez and, at the same time, opens up the possibility of several scenarios worthy of analysis.
The report submitted to PGR involves, among those responsible, Genaro García Luna, former head of the now extinct Ministry of Public Security (who in 2005 was the director of the also defunct Federal Investigation Agency) as well as 20 other officers from AFI and the Federal Public Ministry. According to the Commission’s investigation, their behaviour could constitute several crimes such as abuse of authority, improper exercise of public service and offences against the administration of justice. In the event of a prosecution of the former officials, it would be a hard blow to PAN governments, specifically Calderon’s government, for which García Luna played a key part. It could also imply a redefinition of the relationship between current government and PAN. A potential time bomb.
It is worth mentioning that, for now, the only thing that has happened is the presentation of the legal complaint, the most important is still missing: that the PGR should determine whether there are enough elements to constitute a felony and therefore practice criminal action against them. Right now, the ball’s on PGR’s roof. It is worth noting that, besides the Commission’s report, there already exists a judicial ruling related to the case. The aforementioned judgment (which liberated but not exonerated Cassez) confirmed the existence of illegal behaviour by these authorities. Nevertheless, it is necessary to point out that the continuation of this process does not depend on PGR’s political willingness alone, but from the fulfillment of the main technical and legal requirements. Regarding this matter, it should be noted the apparent difficulty that putting on trial these ex-officers represents. According to the applicable Criminal Code, the three crimes have expired. This means that the time for the authority to prosecute them has finished. Because of this, the PGR´s performance is so relevant, since it must find a legal alternative to continue with the criminal proceedings or, in the other hand, toss them away (with all the potential negative consequences within public opinion that this decision might imply). It should be noted that in the last few years no topic has been as polarizing as this one.
PGR is at a critical conjecture: on one hand, to find a way to prosecute the former officials and fight the image of political impunity associated with Mexico or in the other, to dismiss the case and display the institution’s vices. Either way, PGR is required to act accordingly with the resolution that freed Cassez, which was argued on the basis that justice should be achieved on strict observance of the law. Florence Cassez is no longer a prisoner because of breaches of procedure committed by the authorities in charge of the investigation. It’s up to PGR that, in this case, the story should not repeat itself.
CIDAC
Comments