FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Democracy Failing in Mexico

by LAURA CARLSEN

Mexico City

When Vicente Fox ended the 71-year reign of Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party in the 2000 presidential elections, many observers heralded it as the beginning of a long-overdue transition to democracy. Now President Fox, in a concerted effort with members of the former ruling party, has closed the door on that transition.

By orchestrating a pseudo-legal offensive against Mexico City’s popular mayor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Fox has not only dashed the hopes of Mexicans for a real democracy, but has also destroyed the political capital he gained back in 2000.

Hundreds of thousands of people gathered in Mexico City’s central square to protest Congress’s decision to strip López Obrador of immunity to prosecution granted elected officials. The mayor will now stand trial for allegedly failing to follow a court order to halt work on an access road to a local hospital. According to the federal attorney general’s office, the government will likely put López Obrador behind bars, as a “preventive measure,” before the trial even starts.

According to the vast majority of Mexicans, the government really aims to prevent López Obrador from becoming an official candidate in the 2006 electoral contest. He currently holds a 15% advantage in preference polls.

Although Fox claims that his government’s decision to prosecute is based on legal grounds and that “no-one should be above the law,” the specifics of the case have left few doubts that the prosecution is politically motivated. There is evidence indicating that the Mexico City government was not at fault. Even if it were, it is highly unusual to indict a mayor for infractions by city government officials–much less impeach him based on a minor charge.

In his speech to followers before defending himself in Congress, López Obrador formally declared that he will seek the candidacy of his party, the Party of the Democratic Revolution “from wherever I am.” With his announcement, it became official that the legal persecution of the mayor not only removes a popularly elected official from office but also serves to sideline the opposition frontrunner on a technicality.

The mayor announced the formation of a “broad movement for transformation” to promote not only his defense but also his alternative platform. That platform directly criticizes the government’s economic policies and calls for more social spending and political reforms. López Obrador’s platform of reducing economic inequality–with “First, the Poor” as his slogan–resonates amply in this nation of billionaires and beggars.

He also announced plans to appeal to international human rights groups to fight what he called this “huge step backward for Mexican democracy.” Among the protest crowd in Mexico City’s central plaza, the sense of betrayal by a government elected to usher in the transition to democracy was palpable. Effigies of the president drew boos and whistles. Comments and hand-painted signs supporting Lopez Obrador reflected an unusual mixture of indignation and idolatry, with emotions running high.

It could easily be a volatile mixture. But the mayor’s message to his supporters was to maintain calm and avoid being provoked to violence. “We are the majority,” he told the crowd. “Only those who are in the wrong resort to force.”
What happens next is anyone’s guess. Even the legal implications of the vote are unclear.

What is clear is that President Fox and the country’s ruling parties–PAN and PRI–have plunged the country into political crisis for their own gain. The elections of 2000 offered a promise to consolidate democratic institutions after one-party rule. Some progress had been made. But if the democratic process is manipulated for political ends by those in power, then the promise of transition is betrayed.

Wall Street firms and financial experts had warned Mexican politicians against prosecution of the mayor. No friends of what they see as a populist politician, the main fear is that the maneuver will backfire.

Famed for his austerity and personal integrity, the mantle of political martyr is one that sits well on López Obrador’s shoulders. From prison, his case could burgeon into a symbol of all that’s wrong with Mexico today, greatly enhancing his popularity and his prospects for the presidency.

In a best-case scenario, a real grassroots movement to defend democracy and popular will could lead to long-needed political reforms in Mexico. This will depend on the capacity of the opposition movement to preserve peaceful and democratic means–and on the response of a government whose most recent actions demonstrate irresponsibility and a profound lack of statesmanship.

LAURA CARLSEN is Director of the Americas Program for Interhemispheric Resource Center. She holds a BA in Social Thought and Institutions (1980) from Stanford University and an MA in Latin American Studies (1986) from Stanford. She received a Fulbright Scholarship to study the impact of the Mexican economic crisis on women in 1986 and has since lived in Mexico City. She can be reached at: laura@irc-online.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura Carlsen is the director of the Americas Program in Mexico City and advisor to Just Associates (JASS) .

More articles by:
July 25, 2016
Sharmini Peries - Michael Hudson
As the Election Turns: Trump the Anti-Neocon, Hillary the New Darling of the Neocons
Ted Rall
Hillary’s Strategy: Snub Liberal Democrats, Move Right to Nab Anti-Trump Republicans
William K. Black
Doubling Down on Wall Street: Hillary and Tim Kaine
Quincy Saul
Resurgent Mexico
Andy Thayer
Letter to a Bernie Activist
Patrick Cockburn
Erdogan is Strengthened by the Failed Coup, But Turkey is the Loser
Robert Fisk
The Hypocrisies of Terror Talk
Lee Hall
Purloined Platitudes and Bipartisan Bunk: An Adjunct’s View
Binoy Kampmark
The Futility of Collective Punishment: Russia, Doping and WADA
Nozomi Hayase
Cryptography as Democratic Weapon Against Demagoguery
Cesar Chelala
The Real Donald Trump
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Propaganda Machinery and State Surveillance of Muslim Children
Denis Conroy
Australia: Election Time Blues for Clones
Marjorie Cohn
Killing With Robots Increases Militarization of Police
David Swanson
RNC War Party, DNC War Makers
Eugene Schulman
The US Role in the Israeli-Palestine Conflict
Nauman Sadiq
Imran Khan’s Faustian Bargain
Peter Breschard
Kaine the Weepy Executioner
Weekend Edition
July 22, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Good as Goldman: Hillary and Wall Street
Joseph E. Lowndes
From Silent Majority to White-Hot Rage: Observations from Cleveland
Paul Street
Political Correctness: Handle with Care
Richard Moser
Actions Express Priorities: 40 Years of Failed Lesser Evil Voting
Eric Draitser
Hillary and Tim Kaine: a Match Made on Wall Street
Conn Hallinan
The Big Boom: Nukes And NATO
Ron Jacobs
Exacerbate the Split in the Ruling Class
Jill Stein
After US Airstrikes Kill 73 in Syria, It’s Time to End Military Assaults that Breed Terrorism
Jack Rasmus
Trump, Trade and Working Class Discontent
John Feffer
Could a Military Coup Happen Here?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Late Night, Wine-Soaked Thoughts on Trump’s Jeremiad
Andrew Levine
Vice Presidents: What Are They Good For?
Michael Lukas
Law, Order, and the Disciplining of Black Bodies at the Republican National Convention
David Swanson
Top 10 Reasons Why It’s Just Fine for U.S. to Blow Up Children
Victor Grossman
Horror News, This Time From Munich
Margaret Kimberley
Gavin Long’s Last Words
Mark Weisbrot
Confidence and the Degradation of Brazil
Brian Cloughley
Boris Johnson: Britain’s Lying Buffoon
Lawrence Reichard
A Global Crossroad
Kevin Schwartz
Beyond 28 Pages: Saudi Arabia and the West
Charles Pierson
The Courage of Kalyn Chapman James
Michael Brenner
Terrorism Redux
Bruce Lerro
Being Inconvenienced While Minding My Own Business: Liberals and the Social Contract Theory of Violence
Mark Dunbar
The Politics of Jeremy Corbyn
Binoy Kampmark
Laura Ingraham and Trumpism
Uri Avnery
The Great Rift
Nicholas Buccola
What’s the Matter with What Ted Said?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail