During the last few days, there have been three events involving PRI politicians that have attracted a great deal of media attention. Firstly, the reemergence of accusations against the former leader of the party in Mexico City, Cuauhtémoc Gutiérrez de la Torre, for an alleged human trafficking network. Secondly, the apprehension of Jesús Reyna García, ex-secretary general of Michoacán’s Government, due to presumptive links with organized crime. Lastly, some weeks ago, Senator Arely Gómez withdrew from chairing the special legislative commission in order to “follow up” the Oceanografía case, arguing the fact that one of her family member – an in-law, fourth grade relative – could be part of the scandal involving PEMEX’s former contractor company. The aforementioned three facts have one essential thing in common: both the federal government as well as PRI members claim for a prompt and uncompromising enforcement of law; if somebody has to be punished, so be it, no matter what political party or family the accused might come from.
One would think that current PRI members of government would be different from their PAN predecessors by not covering up, tolerating, never mind defending anyone who committed a crime or was involved in corruption cases and, on the contrary, see justice as the ultimate target. However, this appears to be a slightly more sophisticated use of discretional justice procurement. The “scapegoat”, a concept that has been frequently associated with PRI governments still remains as part of the party’s “new face”, since public officers have been apprehended and judged in an individual manner, while the rest of those involved go unpunished and their criminal organizations remain unscathed. These actions not only prevent “media fire” from spreading (of course, without any further investigation) but are also part of an efficient strategy of political control and even party discipline. It’s not illegal activities but political clumsiness and associated costs what are actually being punished with a zero tolerance policy. For a government that attempts to take care as well as boost its own image, the loss of control in cases such as Michoacán or Mexico City, simply cannot be tolerated.
Likewise, in the face of scandals such as the ones faced by Reyna and Gutiérrez de la Torre, why does opposition appear to be undaunted and indifferent? Wouldn’t it be a great opportunity to finally confront PRI? It could be assumed that both PAN and PRD have to deal with their own busy agendas or their internal issues, which of course hinders their capacity to react to all the missteps undertaken by PRI. Nevertheless, this is the time when cases such as Oceanografía, the 12th Metro line in Mexico City, or members of Senate bribing municipal leaders appear in the scene. Justice’s “sword of Damocles” lies upon the heads of several politicians from all political parties (including PRI).
Historically, PRI has looked down on exercising power as a way to create scandals, being disloyal or contradicting political leaders, but not breaking the law on itself. The aforementioned cases are still pending issues – and, by the way, not all of them are under federal jurisdiction, for instance, the allegations against Gutiérrez de la Torre; it should be highlighted how his party has apparently abandoned him – and it remains to be seen whether the corresponding authorities will apply the famous Benito Juárez principle of procuring justice and grace for friends, but mere law for foes.
CIDAC
Comments