While I don´t follow Mexico's Federal electoral institute (IFE) and its Electoral tribunal (TEPJF) as closely as I should, there seems to me to be quite a bit of anecdotal evidence for two trends:
1) IFE has tended to absolve Governor of Mexico State Enrique Peña Nieto for most every complaint against him, while ordering his opponents to stop many of their ads against him
2) The Electoral tribunal has castigated IFE for many of these decisions.
The IFE operates according to guidelines that it cannot be held responsible for, of course - they were drawn up by congress. While the most recent 2007-8 electoral reform had many positive aspects to it, it is now apparent it also contained quite a few flaws, most apparently the inability - and for now I emphasize inability over unwillingness - of IFE to stop the incessant official propaganda and publicity in Mexico State in favor of its governor.
(By the way, the PRI-led state congress just approved in committee another hike, bringing the sum up, according to PRD, to 1.6 billion pesos)
However, IFE has been quite capable of interpreting its guidelines to ban ads from the PRD or other opposition parties against Peña Nieto. This has happened on a range of occasions, including just a few days ago, when IFE ordered the PRD to take out a line from a political ad that was deemed "denigrating" toward Peña Nieto´s image. The words in question? "Peña Nieto fears the political alliances" [of PAN and PRD].
Really? This line is "denigrating" the governor of Mexico State? I have a hunch that last word is not said in this case. Why? Because the TEPJF unanimously again ordered IFE to reopen another complaint from the PAN against Peña Nieto's government propaganda in relation with his fifth informe, publicity also transmitted in Guerrero and Baja California Sur (upcoming elections), which the IFE rejected. to rule on. It's just one more case of TEPJF ordering IFE to revisit an early decision - hardly dramatic in itself - but it just happens to be on Peña Nieto.
Something is happening here but you don't know what it is. Do you, Mr. Jones.
No comments:
Post a Comment