The enactment of legislative reforms has been one of the hallmarks of Enrique Peña Nieto´s first three months in charge. However, it is essential not to lose sight of the difference between signing a decree and its implementation. The operational phase of the reforms, i.e. reflecting the legal framework, seeing measurable results and finally, evaluating them, is much more complicated than the far from straightforward political negotiation so typical of the legislative process. The complexity increases when Mexican state laws apply. The so-called educational reform, promulgated by the President on 25 February, faces the aforementioned problems with the recent conflicts of local administrations in Guerrero and Oaxaca as well as teachers´ dissidences from within those states.
Belligerence from teachers who are members of the State of Guerrero Workers´ Organisation (CETEG) and Section 22 of the National Union of Education Workers (SNTE) comes as no surprise, especially when the educational reform would (theoretically) deprive them from prerogatives such as staying immune after an unsatisfactory academic review, being entitled to their full wages in spite of spending most time in protests and roadblocks than in a classroom, or having an ensured placement just by graduating from a teacher´s training college. The reactions of Governors Ángel Aguirre and Gabino Cué were atypical. Mr. Aguirre supported an initiative to change the state of Guerrero´s education law, which included premises that were opposed to the federal reform and, consequentially, the Mexican Constitution. Governor Cué almost did the same a few days later but had second thoughts and decided to bring some of the teachers´ premises to the discussion of regulatory legislation in federal Congress. Beyond the delicate matter that a Governor would support unconstitutional guidelines – already rejected by local congressmen in Chilpancingo – it is worth asking: what is failing when the time comes to define authorities ´responsibilities in this sort of crisis?
The unique Mexican federalism has allowed an irresponsible behaviour from states and municipalities in several matters. Still accustomed (and comfortable) with the federal government’s omniscience, local authorities lack incentives needed to fulfill duties such as public security, tax collection and, in this case, the appropriate implementation of constitutional rules. It is unconceivable that a Governor can endanger the implementation of a much-needed reform with just the purpose of “saving his own skin”, politically speaking, or even blackmailing the federal authority with a potential loss of control over a conflict. Likewise, it should be said that the adoption of regulatory laws is still pending. These laws will establish, among other things, what the sanction for a teacher who failed an evaluation will be or whether or not he could lose his placement. With that in mind, the risk of “decaffeinating” the reform increases with incoming pressure from local bastions of power. On the other hand, federal government is not exempt from its responsibility. The federal authority´s inaction during the roadblock of the Autopista del Sol highway in March 22, which jurisdiction belongs to them, could be interpreted as a sign of a fearful government, afraid to act when it should do so, with the risk of tarnishing its image. Even though Mexico is indeed facing a series of pacts and reforms, it is not yet clear it has responsible and responsive governments.
Reforming means affecting interests. In countries in which the existence of a law implies its immediate adoption, the argument is centered on the discussion of that law within the legislative power. In countries like Mexico it is the opposite: it has several laws that apparently only decorate lawyer´s offices. What really matters is the adoption and implementation of these laws. That´s when the political battle starts, and when the specific interests begin to appear. Unlike what appears in the press, who rejoices in the fact that these reforms are approved, the real political work – and at the same time the intrinsic uncertainty – begins after the legislative approval. The story of the reforms by this government is just beginning.
CIDAC
Comments