Consult just because

A citizen of Toluca promotes the popular consultation to prosecute former Mexican presidents.Crisanta Espinosa / Cuartoscuro

Even analyzed with some good faith (and it must be recognized that many people in this country still have it for the Government), the popular consultation that will be held on August 1 at the federal level is a rather inexplicable exercise.

Because what was sold as a measure for "the people" to demonstrate around the possibility of judging several former presidents for the alleged crimes they may have committed during their terms, ended in grotesque, between dimes and diretes, and with the stellar and confused appearance of the Supreme Court (SCJN) on stage.

More information

• 'Vaccines: an injection of reality', by Antonio Ortuño

Let's see: after being consulted by Congress, and under pressure from the opposition, which judged that the consultation was unconstitutional, the SCJN opted for the most exotic path possible. He endorsed the legality of the process, but turned the question that will be answered with a "yes" or a "no" into gibberish, and a remarkable example of how empty legal language can be. The question in question, which originally spoke directly about the trial of the ex-presidents (and took the opportunity to mention as its promoter the current president, who is the biggest fan of self-promotion that our political milieu remembers), was thus: “Are you in agreement that the pertinent actions are carried out, in accordance with the constitutional and legal framework,to undertake a process of clarification of the political decisions taken in the past years by political actors, aimed at guaranteeing justice and the rights of possible victims? ”.

What does this piece of jargon mean? That they send us to ask if we agree with the application of the law. And not only to the former presidents, but to the "political actors" all. Thing to which the legislation itself obliges the "corresponding authorities", without excuse or pretext. In other words, this is like asking people: "Do you want us to do our job?" And without mentioning names, of course, it is not going to be that someone is upset (and there is a curious detail, by the way, in that list finally omitted: although the recipients of the original question were former presidents Salinas, Zedillo, Fox, Calderón and Peña, there was one who is still alive and who freed her. Luis Echeverría was excluded, despite his alleged participation in the bloody episodes of 1968, when he was Secretary of the Interior, and of 1971,already during his period in power, not to mention his also alleged intervention in the so-called “dirty war”).

In short: the question that will be voted on by those who decide to go to the polls that will be opened for this purpose on August 1 is so empty that even some of the unofficial defenders of the federal government have had to accept that, in view of the fact that the Consultation does not raise anything that is not in the law, and it is not binding, that is, its result does not oblige anyone to anything, it is a waste of time ... Or almost. "It is a symbol that you want to do justice," whispers someone, who forgets that spending 500 million of the federal budget to "send messages" seems somewhat exaggerated. And very expensive. Would it not be more eloquent if well-founded inquiries and judicial processes were integrated into the alleged crimes of the former presidents without waiting to see what a consultation says?

The most likely scenario is that attendance at the polls is modest (since it does not matter to vote or not, why travel and risk, in the middle of a pandemic?), But that, even so, the Government cackles it as a milestone in Mexican democracy.

And so we will have another piece in our brand-new museum of the implausible, to be placed next to the raffle in which what was announced was not raffled: the consultation in which nothing was decided.

Subscribe here

to the

of EL PAÍS México and receive all the informative keys of the current situation of this country