Within the negotiations of the energy reform, the left-wing parties have pressed to advance on the secondary legislation of the 2012 reforms to the 35th Constitutional article on the popular consultation matter. From several months ago, different voices, highlighting the claims by Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, have intended to build a narrative where the aforementioned suffrage concept may imply the last available resource as to stop the opening up of the energy sector.
Although the issue of secondary legislation showed some progress on December 10th with the approval of the Federal Law of Popular Consultation within the Chamber of Deputies, the proposal was stopped in the Senate. During the last day of sessions in the aforementioned venue, PAN members broke the quorum as to avoid the discussion and questioning of the legislative process by highlighting that the document should be calmly revised (which is odd, given than calm was not precisely one of the trademarks of legislative procedures that have gone through in recent weeks). However, the relevant question right now is: in the supposed case that the popular consultation takes place and despite all the locks it contains, will it be able, just like it happened in the Senate, to reverse the energy reform?
It is unlikely that a future popular consultation will reverse the Constitutional changes established by the energy reform. Despite the fact that PRD is looking for a second oil expropriation in 2015, popular consultation will not be able to be used as a medium to revoke decisions that have already been taken by Congress. On the other hand, for the aforementioned consultation to be binding, at least 40% of the electorate should participate, which is a high number considering that is usually not achieved even in Presidential elections, let alone intermediate ones, such as the elections to be held 19 months from now. In the end, it will turn out to be a complex ordeal for those that are opposed to the reform to sustain the strength of their protests as well as the widening of their ranks.
According to the “frozen” proposal issued on the Senate, if popular consultation is solicited by society, the Supreme Court of Justice will be the one who will resolve its importance and constitutionality. In that sense, the Popular Consultation Law would explicitly forbid voting for issues related to federal income and expenditure. Taking into account that PEMEX generates essential income in the country’s budgetary balance, interpreting this law might lead to a declaration of unconstitutionality from a consultation that might affect the oil company, especially on something that has already been executed. Nevertheless, the issue has the potential to become a red alert for the federal government, not so much for the popular consultation itself, but due to the uncertainty scenario generated by the lack of clear information regarding its consequences.
It is true. The approval of the energy reform has sent a positive message to potential investors from the oil sector. However, there are two risk factors whose attention seems essential. Firstly, the government should take a step forward and clarify all doubts regarding the potential consequences of a popular consultation. Secondly, the federal authorities do not seem to consider the danger of a sign such as the one issued by the swift legislative procedure of the reform. Several left-wing legislators have repeatedly stated: “he who kills early, dies early” (that is to say, what comes quickly, can also be left quickly.
In sum, PRD is aiming for a bad placebo. The limits for the popular consultation turn it into a mechanism of citizen participation that is futile in discussing almost all relevant issues in the country, by leaving side issues related with income and expenditure as well as national security. Undoubtedly, improving the mechanisms of citizen participation is one of the pending issues in Mexico’s democratic buildup. The challenge will be massive if, as stated by PAN leader Gustavo Madero, the population “doesn’t give a damn” about political matters. Although questioning such a vulgar statement, it is true that there is still lot to do with the aim of fighting the Mexican disenchantment with public affairs.
What is left unresolved are the political conflict left by the legislative process is leaving behind as well as the way that potential investors – whose horizon, due to the nature of the energy sector, takes decade to form itself – might assess and interpret it. These issues will be of critical importance in coming months
CIDAC
Comments