Mexico in Focus

Who rules Tamaulipas?

The assassination of Rodolfo Torre Cantú, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) candidate for governor in Tamaulipas, is a terrible blow for Mexico and its democratic institutions.

The assassination occurred just six days before the July 4 elections in 14 Mexican states, among them, Tamaulipas, Chihuahua, Sinaloa, Durango and Oaxaca.

Torre Cantú was killed in an ambush. The killers knew that the vehicle the candidate would be using Monday was not bullet-proof, they knew which route he would be taking and they surely knew the huge impact this killing would have in the country on the eve of elections.   

Torre Cantú was the second political candidate assassinated in the northeastern state of Tamaulipas in two months.  On May 13, José María Guajardo Varela, the Partido Acción Nacional (PAN) candidate for mayor of Valle Hermoso was killed along with his son and his driver.

Tamaulipas has been in the center of news reports not just because the high levels of violence, but also because the state seems to be totally under control of the narcos. They rule the main cities, they control the business, they have imposed their own laws.

The reasons behind the assassination are not clear yet. Torre Cantú was leading the electoral polls and he was close to the current political power in the state. Why to kill him? What message his killing is sending?

We have to wait for answers yet, but one clear thing now is that the killing of Torre Cantú is the most serious challenge to Mexico’s democracy in recent years. It is an open challenge to the institutions and nobody could take it lightly.  President Calderon delivered two national messages between yesterday and today. He’s asking to all political forces to come together in finding a new response to organized crime. He looks desperate. He needs to unify efforts, he needs to be backed up for all the political forces. His leadership is being tested again.

It should have been desirable to suspend the election in Tamaulipas. Unfortunately, the state electoral institute decided to go ahead with the process. In the next hours we should know the name of the new PRI candidate.

However, the damage is already done. Doesn’t matter who win the election on July 4. The citizens know now who really rules the state.

Democracy in diapers

Unlike the U.S. elections, where everything happens so smoothly, Mexican elections are always noisy and complicated.

Since I can recall, we haven’t had an election free of complains about the process itself or about the resulting outcomes. 

Complaints are intrinsic to any democratic process, especially when there are more than two parties involved in the competition for the popular vote. In the case of Mexico, we can’t forget that it’s a democracy that is still in diapers. It was not too long ago, in 1990, when the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) was created as an independent institution to regulate the electoral process, but it was not until 1996, that the institution gained its real autonomy from the executive power. Although it is difficult to assure that 100 percent of the population is convinced about the autonomy of the IFE, it would be impossible to deny that the institution has helped to make the electoral process more transparent, equitable and fair for all the participants.

The structure of the IFE is replicated in all the Mexican states. However, the majority of those electoral institutes don’t have the same grade of credibility as the federal institute. One of the main complaints is that the citizens’ representatives in those institutions don’t really represent the citizens, but the politicians and their political parties.  For that reason, the critics say, there are not consequences for the candidates who break the rules of financing or fair competition.

On July 4, 14 Mexican states will elect 1,500 officials. This coming Saturday and Sunday, most of the candidates will end their political campaigns in the middle of unsolved accusations of using public resources to attract voters. In some states and towns, candidates have been linked to drug trafficking organizations and just a few of investigation are going on about their financing. In some other states, the elections have been contaminated with political espionage.

What is interesting is that before the year 2000, most of the complaints were against the candidates of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), the party that ruled Mexico for more than 70 years. But now, the same kind of complaints and accusations are being levied against candidates representing all the parties, from the right-wing Partido Accion Nacional –who now rules the country–, to the leftist Partido de la Revolución Demócratica (PRD).

What this means is that the long-time PRI-monopolized practice of “compra de voto” (buying your vote) became widespread and useful for all of Mexico’s political parties.

That is the current state of Mexican democracy and our state electoral institutes are still not strong enough to guarantee fair, transparent and credible elections.

 

 

The vicious circle of impunity

A news story published by El Universal, Mexico City’s newspaper, documents one of the main problems afflicting Mexico today: impunity.

Using the equivalent of the Freedom of Information Act, El Universal found that 95 percent of the drug war-related deaths were not under investigation. This means that out of more than 22,000 deaths registered between 2006 and today, there are only 1,200 investigations currently going on.

What happens with the rest of the cases?

Who knows, but for sure, the criminals are walking down the streets without fear of facing any justice.

Impunity is not a new problem at all. Mexicans have been suffering the consequences of this problem for a long time, and some figures illustrate the evidence of this: It is estimated that only 3 percent of Mexico’s judicial trials ended up with a sentence. And according to official estimates, criminals have only a 3 percent chance of being detained after committing a crime.

Impunity is the product of corruption and the resulting lack of trust in the judicial system. It can be framed as a vicious cycle--people decide not to report crime because they don’t trust the system, and because people don’t report them, criminals feel free to do whatever they please.

Luis de la Barreda, director of the Instituto Ciudadano de Estudios Sobre la Inseguridad, a non-profit organization that studies issues of public safety, has said that eight out of each 10 homicides committed in Mexico are not punished.  In comparison, countries such as Japan or Spain have a rate of nine people penalized for every 10 homicides.

Mexican officials have promoted a judicial reform to solve some of these problems, however, the proposed measures don’t look enough to change the current culture of impunity and corruption and to create a sense of trust in the judicial system. The key is to recover citizens’ confidence in their authorities, but when things are so deteriorated as they look now in Mexico, that simple objective could be extremely difficult to achieve.

What could be worse for a country than to have crime out of control?. A problem such as this, not only erodes the social fabric, but also breaks the rules of peaceful coexistence among human beings.

Until now, Mexicans have learned how to live with this problem without it affecting their peaceful coexistence, but during times when criminality is surpassing the ability of the state to control it, the day of an eye-for-an-eye justice will not be very far away. And that would be the worse scenario in front of us.

 

 

Moving around using public transportation

My car broke down one week ago and since then, I’ve been using public transportation.

I grew up in Mexico City and I’m used to public transportation. Actually, I would rather use the bus, the subway or a collective cab (pesero) than drive my car on the always congested avenues of the big city. 

Public transportation is very efficient in Mexico City. Your have a lot of routes and  different alternatives, so you can move around easily. Probably the main problem is that most of the time the buses or the subway are crowded and you can’t find a seat. That would be a hassle if you go from Indios Verdes to Tlalpan, or the equivalent of going from Downton El Paso to Ysleta.

But here in El Paso, using the public transportation system has been a really tiring and frustrating experience.

On Tuesday, for example, I spent almost 40 minutes waiting for a bus under the blazing sun on Mesa Street.  There was not a tree, nor even a small shadow in which you can find protection from the furious ultraviolet radiation. I walked several blocks trying to find a nice spot to read while waiting for the bus, but of course, I never found it.

Another day, I waited 20 minutes for a bus that would take me to El Paso Community College’s Valle Verde campus. A journey that would usually only take 15 minutes from Downtown, it took more than 40 minutes.  In total, the trip from home (in the west side) to the Santa Fe terminal and from there to Valle Verde, took me two hours.

Not long ago, before my car broke, I had decided that I would use the bus at least one day per week. That day, while I was waiting for the bus, a guy started talking to me and as the conversation went on, I told him that I was riding the bus because I wanted to be eco-friendly.

“Are you nuts?” That was his answer. He start laughing at me and repeating all the time that I was nuts. He said that only poor and crazy people ride the bus in the city.

I felt saddened by his answer, but at the same time, I realized that in a way, I was nuts. I was going to waste a lot of time this way and I went back to using my car.

This week, another person told me something interesting about public transportation.   After talking about the time and inconveniences of riding the bus, he said that the public transportation system in El Paso is bad for one simple reason:  “The people who ride the bus are the poorest,” he said. “They don’t vote, so why should politicians care about them?”

And he had a point. Usually the people who ride the bus in most American cities are the poorest (with the exception of larger cities such as New York, Washington, Chicago or others where public transportation is the only way to get around). But it is sad that in a city like El Paso, nobody has even thought about the need for some shade for the people who have to wait a long time for the bus.

I’m assuming that working in a more efficient public transportation system requires more budget and other considerations that have been already analyzed by the city authorities. Probably there’s not an easy solution for it, but it would be good to think, once in a while, in all these people –many of them old folks– who have not any other way of moving around than the buses.

In the meantime, I'm getting a nice cap, an umbrella, a good sun-block lotion and a good amount of patience to wait for the buses this coming week.

Chihuahua and its disenchantment with elections

State and local elections in Chihuahua are 19 days away, but the expectation about their outcome is low.

On July 4, the people from Chihuahua will choose a new governor and 67 new municipal positions, among them a new mayor for Ciudad Juárez. They will also vote for 33 state legislators.

Talking with different people from Cd. Juárez – most of them young people – I found they shared a sense of disenchantment and lack of interest in the electoral process.

“I’m going to cancel my vote on the ballot,” said Victor Portillo, a 22-year-old student from UTEP. “I don’t trust politics. If I would vote for somebody I would be putting some of my hope on that person, and I don’t think they could do anything to change the situation.”

Carlos Murillo, a sociologist who works for El Colegio de Chihuahua, has done extensive research about turn out in the electoral process.  He estimates that in Cd. Juárez, less than 30 percent of the population registered to vote will do so. At the state level, the participation will be about 30 percent.  

“What we have seen in this process is that most of the people have a very bad perspective about politics,” he said. “In the case of young people, what we are seeing is a lack of interest in political participation. And if we talk about more educated people, what we find is a growing preference for the null vote.”

The null vote has been a constant in recent elections, where voters decided not to give their vote to any of the parties, but instead they cross out the ballot completely as a sign of protest because of the lack of viable choices.

The “fear factor” could be a big issue in this election too. Daily killings in Cd. Juárez and Chihuahua, as well as the bloody attacks on police forces have created a sense of insecurity in the general population, and because of this people won’t want to expose themselves to waiting in a line to cast their votes.

When asking people from Juarez or Chihuahua how they feel about the elections, the first thing that they mention is that none of the candidates will be able to solve the problems of safety and organized crime. I found it very difficult to find anybody who would tell me something different.

 “The bloody war is going to continue for more than 10 years because nobody knows how to stop it. They want to be in power, but they won’t do anything…So, why should I vote then?” stated another young student.

All these issues together – the fear factor, the lack of interest, the disenchantment with politics–make analysts think that the result of the elections will be defined by the so-called “hard vote,” which usually comes from people who are members of the political parties.  Unfortunately, the hard vote doesn’t necessarily reflect what people want–which means, nothing will change, and no problems will be solved because the candidates won't feel a sense of accountability to the public. Considering that, seems that this election will not provide any glimpse into a better future for Chihuahuenses.

 

A dividing issue among Americans

I’ve been doing journalism in this country for more than eight years now. Despite of all of this time, I still get surprised with the uproar and tensions that immigration and border issues cause once in a while.

Just reading the many comments posted not just on this space, but in many other local and national outlets, I reaffirm the idea that there is not a dividing issue in America than immigration.  The killing of Sergio Adrián Hernández Guereca by a Border Patrol officer on Monday is a clear example of how this issue confronts society.

In the middle of this debate, Sergio is either a criminal –who was breaking the law in his attempt to cross the border illegally– and in consequence deserved what he got, or is an innocent victim of a failed policy to control the border. There are not gray tones in this line.

With a public opinion so divided, the human drama around the killing becomes a secondary story.  Compassion is lacking. A 15-year old boy was assassinated because he was throwing rocks at a police officer. He put the officer’s life in risk and also put American jobs, security and economy in risk because he was trying to cross illegally. In this vision, the end justifies the means.

On the other side of the spectrum, the opinions are also extreme. During a public protest yesterday, an activist was referring to president Obama as an assassin. In his view, Obama was responsible for the killing, because he has not pushed  immigration reform enough on his agenda.

There’s no question about the abuse of power involved in the tragic incident under the Puente Negro. A weapon was fired against a disarmed boy.  Even if he tried to cross the border illegally, even if he had thrown a rock to the BP agent, the response was excessive.

Three days have passed and information about the incident is flowing slowly, but there is not anything official yet. The U.S. government has promised a meticulous investigation on the incident and the Mexican counterpart is doing the same. The amateur videos and photos that we have seen in media must be analyzed as part of that investigation.   It would be desirable to have the results as soon as possible, because the longer that it takes, the deeper the tensions become. 

Besides finding those responsibles for the tragedy, the investigation would culminate in a desirable review of the law enforcement protocols to deal with “rock attacks” in the border. Unfortunately, this has not been the first incident of its kind on the border, but it could be the last one, if there is willingness to analyze what went wrong last Monday and to try to avoid the mistake.

Both countries –in their own terrain- have a lot to do to prevent another tragedy like the one that is affecting Sergio’s family today.

Tensions on the rise

The killing of a 14-year-old boy, apparently by a Border Patrol agent, will surely add tension to border issues between Mexico and the United States.

This is the second time in one week that Border Patrol agents have been involved in a violent incident.

On May 31, Anastasio Hernandez was shot with a stun gun by an immigration officer at the San Ysidro border in California.  Before being shot, the man was badly beaten. These incidents led to his death, which has been ruled as a homicide and is being investigated.

There are not enough details yet about the incident yesterday under the Puente Negro (in Downtown El Paso) and we should wait for the results of the investigation. However, given the tension created by Arizona’s new immigration law, it is possible to anticipate not only several protests–as happened in San Ysidro– but also a new diplomatic incident that will bring the issue of immigration to the table again.

 

Crossing my fingers for Mexico's team

Mexicans will be on the edge of their seats for two hours next Friday.

And if their team gets lucky and wins the first match of soccer’s World Cup, joy will overtake the country for at least two more days, until the next match causes them to be on edge again for another two hours.

Yes, for good or for bad, the World Cup is around the corner and it will affect the time and daily life not only of Mexicans, but also of all of the people in many other Latin American countries., where the passion for soccer makes them to forget about their problems. For a month, they can can hope, for at least a little while, that their country may be recognized as a world champion.

Not all Mexicans love soccer (I’m one of those who really doesn’t care about sports), but the majority of them do. In fact, hundreds of papers have been written worldwide trying to explain people’s passion for soccer.

 The French-Algerian existentialist philosopher, Albert Camus, once said that there is not any place in the world where a man can feel happier than in a soccer stadium. He also has been quoted as saying, “what I know most surely about morality and the duty of man I owe to soccer.”

The Spanish writer, Javier Marias, has said that soccer is the way that men recover their childhood. Philosopher and sociologist Edgar Morin also equated soccer with poetry and fine arts. 

In many countries, soccer provides a relief valve for many of the social, political and economic pressures.  Those pressures can be released in a positive or in a negative way.  Who doesn’t remember the killing of Andres Escobar, a Colombian soccer player who was slain in 1994 apparently because of a goal that he kicked in for the U.S., which led to Colombia’s early elimination from the Cup? Who has not seen the British hooligans in rowdy demonstrations of soccer fanaticism? Who has not seen the amazing and vibrant dance demonstrations of Brazilians after a victory?

In some way, soccer gives us a window to look at the culture of different countries. No wonder sociologists or anthropologists like to analyze fan behavior in soccer games.

I don’t have any idea about how Mexico will do in this World Cup. I haven’t followed the team’s preparation and I barely recognize some of the names in the roster. However, I will see the inaugural game on Friday, where Mexico will face South Africa. I will keep my fingers crossed because I really, really would like for Mexico to win this match. I think Mexicans need and deserve a moment of happiness and if soccer gives it to them, that’s great, and who knows, maybe after this match, I might become a soccer fan.

A mourning day in Mexico

Mexico is in mourning today.

One year ago, 49 children died and more than 70 were injured as a result of a fire that started in a warehouse and consumed the ABC daycare center in the city of Hermosillo, in the northern state of Sonora.

It has been a year and the parents of each of these kids are still demanding justice. Until now, neither the daycare’s owners or the state and federal officials involved in authorizing or regulating this kind of services, have assumed any responsibility for the tragedy.  And off course, nobody has been punished.

A Supreme Court investigation, headed by judge Arturo Zaldívar, has implied 19 public officials, among them, the former governor of Sonora, Eduardo Bours, the current Transportation and Communication Secretary, Juan Molinar Horcasitas (former head of the Social Security Institute –IMSS-, the entity that overview day care centers) and Daniel Karam, the current IMSS director. The Supreme Court investigation concludes that state and federal officials should be held accountable for the tragic incident.  “To be a public officer is more than a privilege. It is a responsibility that should be honored everyday…and any serious omission must be pointed out and to have consequences”, the investigation indicates.

It is heartbreaking to listen the testimonies of the parents. Nobody could have anticipated what was going to happen that day.  They said goodbye to their kids thinking that they will see them few hours later, but they never imagined that the daycare would become an inferno.

President Calderon has declared June 5 as a National Mourning Day, but hopefully his actions would go behind that. All the Supreme Court members will discuss Zaldivar’s opinion on June 14. After discussing it, the judges are expected to make recommendations to the authorities, but it will be just the government’s decision to take specific actions on this particular issue.

Those children are not here anymore and nothing will bring them back, but at least, we should expect responsibility, justice and accountability from the authorities.

That’s the only way that we can avoid the repetition of a tragedy as the one that has Mexico in mourning today.

Renewing the Mexican police...Is it possible?

Mexican President Felipe Calderón has the support of most of the state governors to create a national-unified police. It has been one of his goals since he took office in 2006.

On Thursday, Calderón announced that he is ready to introduce a Constitutional reform bill that would create 32 state police forces, each of one operating under a unified command.

According to Mr. Calderon, a unified police would allow the government to have a better knowledge and control of the police forces, creating mechanisms to carry out routine examinations to officers and providing a more effective training and coordination to fight against organized crime.

The idea makes sense. Currently, Mexico has more than 2,400 municipal police forces, which are not necessarily coordinated or integrated into a state or national body. In many of these little police departments, the agents receive no training or equipment enough to do their job. Teresa Incháustegui, a federal legislator from the leftist Partido de la Revolución Democrática (PRD) has said that only five percent of the law enforcement officers in the country meet the minimum requirements -in terms of training and equipments- to face organized crime.

The majority of those municipal police officers receive a monthly salary of less than $300, according to Public Safety Secretary, Genaro García Luna.  In some areas of the country, their salary is even less than $100 per month. Poorly paid officers are an easy prey for corruption, García admitted in a meeting with federal legislators in the beginning of the year.

In Calderon’s view, a unified police would help to solve many of the problems that municipal and state police forces face every day. But most important, it would facilitate coordination in the areas of intelligence, investigation and crime prevention.

It does sound good in paper.  The problem, however, are the many how to do it that the proposal arises. Are the more than 400,000 current municipal police officers going to be integrated into the state police forces? How are they going to do the clean up of the forces? Are better salaries and working conditions enough to deter corruption? How can they guarantee that the high state commands won’t get into corruption? How long will it take –if it happens– to restore the public’s confidence in the police corps? How will the government guarantee the police’s forces accountability?

Let’s not be pessimistic. Let’s think that creating a unified police force could be a good beginning, but if we are realistic, to have a reliable and capable Mexican police could take more than one generation to be true. Maybe the children of our children shall be the one to see the results.