The current Mexican legislation allows carrying up to 5 grams of marijuana for personal consumption; however, its production, commercialization, transportation and sale are forbidden activities in federal laws. This is a paradoxical scheme because although consuming marijuana in Mexico does not necessarily equate to committing a crime, the latter can only be realized if several conditions occur for its production. Commercialization is certainly one of them. Starting from this contradiction and addressing one of the pending issues in the party’s social agenda, legislators from the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) presented a project that would allow increasing the permitted amount for carrying marijuana, as well as its production and commercialization with medical purposes, through a potential modification of the General Health Law as well as the Federal Criminal Code. On the other hand, a PRD faction from Mexico City Congress, in addition to supporting the federal legislative draft, is also boosting several initiatives that aim to regulate the sale of inhalants through the Law for Integral Attention towards the Law for Psychoactive Substances Consumption in Mexico City, as well as implementing prevention campaigns; in other words, this is what could be done on the matter, both possibly and strategically.
These projects intensified the debate regarding the decriminalization and regulation of drugs within Mexico and once again, the familiar arguments both in favor and against were heard, with points of view ranging from morality, public health and security. Likewise, there have been several studies about the benefits that these types of public policies have on an economic aspect, whether it is through the potential collection of additional taxes or savings made in those resources spent to sanction its production and commercialization through the State’s security and justice apparatus. It is essential to discuss the arguments voices by all ideologies in order to generate a serious and informed debate. But beyond analysis, the panorama for this initiative is complex, especially because being a local issue it requires changes at a federal level.
Regardless of the scarce viability, factions within PRD have decided to go ahead and immediately it was evident the conflict within sectors of the party. A project headed by two congressmen (Vidal Llerenas and Estela Damián), a Senator (Mario Delgado) and a federal Deputy (Fernando Belaunzarán) had just finished being presented when PRD’s main factions had already expressed their stance. At a local level, the legislators that are members of the National Democratic Leftwing (IDN) issued a statement that said that the project is a proposal subject to individual behalf on whoever is promoting it and it does not represent the entire parliamentary group within Congress. In that same vein, the national PRD leadership and the delegate of Izapalapa both expressed a similar point of view. On the other hand, Martí Batres, leader of the Movement for National Regeneration (MORENA) voiced its intention to hold a referendum that deals with such a controversial matter.
With little agreements within the party and given the fact that it is an issue that is not within Mexico City jurisdiction, what was the purpose of two PRD members that identify themselves with Jesús Ortega’s faction and two other members akin to Marcelo Ebrard in opening this debate? Perhaps it is a hint towards an acceptance of the progressive and liberal leftwing prevalent in Mexico City, which is beginning to feel unsatisfied with the current administration of the capital and run the risk of turning into political capital for the opposition, especially the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). Another explanation could be that it is an attempt to differentiate the factions that exist within the party using the aforementioned matter: those akin to Ortega and Ebrard (pro-liberalization), Morena (supporting restriction) and those akin to Bejarano (in favor of a pragmatic solution). The latter would represent a risky strategy, since the possibilities of the initiative to be successfully passed within the legislative process are scarce, and the chances of the latter to result in an electoral advantage are low. At the same time, the failure and internal struggles do imply a high cost both for the party’s structure as well as the image it aims to portray to the general public.
CIDAC
Comments