Almost three years ahead of the 2012 contest, any poll on possible presidential contenders is likely to reflect principally name recognition rather than any clear intended vote among the electorate. Not unsurprisingly given his excessive promotion in media, governor Enrique Peña Nieto is ahead with just above 50 percent, according to a poll by Gabinete de Comunicación Estratégica.
What is more notable is the low party identification among the electorate. PRD, for one, has a vote intention of only 10 percent in Michoacán, 11.8 in Baja California Sur, and 14 percent in Guerrero, states it currently governs. More disturbingly, in its bastion Mexico City, PRD's vote intention - regardless of candidate - is only 10 percent.
Notably, within the 31 states and federal district, the percentage of people who do not identify directly with a party ranges form to to 49 percent.
A poll is a poll is a poll. Yet it is likely to throw more fuel to the fire for those within the PRD and the left in general who are advocating a "citizen candidate" not directly affiliated with a party. Here, Juan Ramón de la Fuente and even José Woldenberg stand out as clear alternatives.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Five minutes before scheduled meeting, Interior ministry cancels on PRD
The silence and cowardice from the Mexican interior ministry with regards to the blatant breaches by the catholic church of Mexican law and of the constitution itself continues. Five minutes before the Interior Ministry's director of religious affairs Juan Pablo Tort was to meet with PRD representatives, the meeting was abruptly cancelled, leaving PRD federal legislators literally standing at the gate of the interior ministry.
PRD declared it would file another criminal complaint against the church directly with the interior ministry, for its hate speech against gays and for contravening the laws regulating religious associations, and for constitutional transgressions such as openly calling for its congregation not to vote for the PRD.
PRD declared it would file another criminal complaint against the church directly with the interior ministry, for its hate speech against gays and for contravening the laws regulating religious associations, and for constitutional transgressions such as openly calling for its congregation not to vote for the PRD.
Ulises Ruiz still has 100 days left of plundering and covering his tracks
More than seven weeks(!) after winning the election, governor-elect Gabino Cué was finally able to convince outgoing governor Ulises Ruiz of sitting down for a meeting. Ruiz' failure to meet his successor, as well as a rash of legislative initiative to secure his impunity, is another testimony to the absurdity of having to wait six months from election day until assumption of power. A little over a week ago, the local PRI-dominated congress om its "own initiative" decided to exonerate Ruiz for the massive human rights violations - the gunning down of protesters - on his watch; just recently, the same state congress approved Ruiz' cuenta pública, or public expenditure, despite reports of a budget deficit of a billion pesos.
What remains to be seen is exactly to what lengths Cué will go to in order to end Ruiz impunity and launch his own investigations of Ruiz' many institutional transgressions and what is likely to be uncovered as massive corruption. In the meantime, Ruiz' will have 100 days more in office to cover his tracks: This, unfortunately, is what the "transition period" entails.
What remains to be seen is exactly to what lengths Cué will go to in order to end Ruiz impunity and launch his own investigations of Ruiz' many institutional transgressions and what is likely to be uncovered as massive corruption. In the meantime, Ruiz' will have 100 days more in office to cover his tracks: This, unfortunately, is what the "transition period" entails.
Recommended source in English on the rule of law in Mexico: Justice in Mexico project
The Justice in Mexico project, part of the The Transborder Institute of San Diego, CA, and headed by academic and Mexico specialist David Shirk, offers plenty of useful reports on the rule of law and justice in Mexico. One fairly straightforward source that is quite readable and accurate and offered in English is their monthly news report, which offers a run-down of the most significant rule of law developments in Mexico at both national and state levels. The project also offers a blog. Both are worth checking out.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Cardinal Juan Sandoval Iñiguez: No man of god, but a trajectory of infamy
Cardinal Juan Sandoval of Guadalajara is the subject of an article in Milenio Semanal, the weekly supplement to the newspaper Milenio. It is a highly recommended introductory summary to the dark story of Sandoval Iñiguez' life, and is not pretty reading. To begin:
On protestants: "To be a protestant, one cannot have any shame"
On women rape victims: "Women should not go around being so provoking; because of this there are so many rapes."
The cardinal's role has always been eminently political in nature, as he has organized opposition to the use of condoms, sex education, emergency contraceptive pills, and, of course, his recent activism on the subject of gay marriage.
Yet as the article touches upon, he has also been under investigation by SIEDO (Subprocuraduría de Investigación Especializada en Delincuencia Organizada), or the special office for investigating organized crime, as well as UEIORPIFAM (the real title is far too long!), which specializes in economy crimes, for possible money laundering. The investigation petered out, allegedly due to political pressures, as Sandoval is a very powerful and well-connected man. He is very close to infamous governor of Jalisco Emilio González Márquez, who caused a scandal when he sought to "donate" more than 15 million pesos of state money to a church (the governor famously responded to the critics of this blatant theft from the state coffer and violation of church-state separation, with the exhortation that they "go fuck their mothers").
Yet there is much more. An investigation by Sanjuana Martínez relates how the cardinal was not only close to the infamous serial pedophile Marcial Maciel, of the Legionares of Christ, but helped found Casa Alberione, a church institution in Tlaquepaque that claims to treat "addictions" of pedophile priests but has been denounced as a safe house for pederasts. Sandoval, as other high members of the Mexican catholic clergy, has notoriously rejected organizations helping the church's victims such as SNAP(Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) for merely being in it for the money, rather than addressing their complaints.
Martínez, in her 2008 investigation, interviews at depth Jorge Carpizo - former UNAM rector, minister (justice) of the Supreme Court, and president of the Human Rights Commission, among other offices - who was Attorney General for a period under the government of Carlos Salinas, and pressed the criminal charges of money laundering and illicit enrichment mentioned in the Milenio Semanal article. Carpizo notably accuses the investigation of having stalled after much political pressure: The cardinal simply has too much powerful friends in high places. As such, this hardly warrants much optimism regarding the recent suit against the cardinal.
The article, Cardenal de los Ricos by Sanjuana Martínez, in Jorge Zapeda Patterson's Los Intocables from 2008, is very well worth further read on the subject of cardinal Sandoval. I'll let Carpizo have the final word here (p. 18):
On protestants: "To be a protestant, one cannot have any shame"
On women rape victims: "Women should not go around being so provoking; because of this there are so many rapes."
The cardinal's role has always been eminently political in nature, as he has organized opposition to the use of condoms, sex education, emergency contraceptive pills, and, of course, his recent activism on the subject of gay marriage.
Yet as the article touches upon, he has also been under investigation by SIEDO (Subprocuraduría de Investigación Especializada en Delincuencia Organizada), or the special office for investigating organized crime, as well as UEIORPIFAM (the real title is far too long!), which specializes in economy crimes, for possible money laundering. The investigation petered out, allegedly due to political pressures, as Sandoval is a very powerful and well-connected man. He is very close to infamous governor of Jalisco Emilio González Márquez, who caused a scandal when he sought to "donate" more than 15 million pesos of state money to a church (the governor famously responded to the critics of this blatant theft from the state coffer and violation of church-state separation, with the exhortation that they "go fuck their mothers").
Yet there is much more. An investigation by Sanjuana Martínez relates how the cardinal was not only close to the infamous serial pedophile Marcial Maciel, of the Legionares of Christ, but helped found Casa Alberione, a church institution in Tlaquepaque that claims to treat "addictions" of pedophile priests but has been denounced as a safe house for pederasts. Sandoval, as other high members of the Mexican catholic clergy, has notoriously rejected organizations helping the church's victims such as SNAP(Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) for merely being in it for the money, rather than addressing their complaints.
Martínez, in her 2008 investigation, interviews at depth Jorge Carpizo - former UNAM rector, minister (justice) of the Supreme Court, and president of the Human Rights Commission, among other offices - who was Attorney General for a period under the government of Carlos Salinas, and pressed the criminal charges of money laundering and illicit enrichment mentioned in the Milenio Semanal article. Carpizo notably accuses the investigation of having stalled after much political pressure: The cardinal simply has too much powerful friends in high places. As such, this hardly warrants much optimism regarding the recent suit against the cardinal.
The article, Cardenal de los Ricos by Sanjuana Martínez, in Jorge Zapeda Patterson's Los Intocables from 2008, is very well worth further read on the subject of cardinal Sandoval. I'll let Carpizo have the final word here (p. 18):
"It turns out that this gentleman commits the most serious of affronts to mankind. And that this gentleman is supposedly a representative of god on earth, yet commits so many sins. Can cardinal Sandoval Iñiguez really believe in God? Or is he simply a true hypocrite?"
The specter of violence is looming as a consequence of the church hate speech
Yesterday's events in downtown Guadalajara are frightening, for so many reasons.
Civil society groups defending sexual diversity and separation of church and state had announced they would hold a demonstration the Plaza de Armas. Yet a group of catholic activists got hold of the demonstration, arrived early, and prevented them from displaying banners repudiating cardinal Juan Sandoval's recent declarations.
The level of discourse? From the catholic activists: "Go adopt a dog, fags!"
Such hate speech is far from isolated to a few extremist activist elements in the streets; they merely mimick Sandoval's infamous "Would you like to be adopted by a pair of lesbians or fags?"
The frightening implication is: When the Mexican church's own leaders, rather than calling for tolerance, respect, and love for the other, are directly responsible for whipping up such hatred, when will it come to blows?
Moreover, yesterday's demonstration also shows the proximity of the most most reactionary, pre-enlightenment, homophobic, inteolerant, misogenic sectors of the church with the state government: Two of governor Emilio González Márquez' own sons joined the catholic activists in preventing the pro-gay groups from demonstrating.
Civil society groups defending sexual diversity and separation of church and state had announced they would hold a demonstration the Plaza de Armas. Yet a group of catholic activists got hold of the demonstration, arrived early, and prevented them from displaying banners repudiating cardinal Juan Sandoval's recent declarations.
The level of discourse? From the catholic activists: "Go adopt a dog, fags!"
Such hate speech is far from isolated to a few extremist activist elements in the streets; they merely mimick Sandoval's infamous "Would you like to be adopted by a pair of lesbians or fags?"
The frightening implication is: When the Mexican church's own leaders, rather than calling for tolerance, respect, and love for the other, are directly responsible for whipping up such hatred, when will it come to blows?
Moreover, yesterday's demonstration also shows the proximity of the most most reactionary, pre-enlightenment, homophobic, inteolerant, misogenic sectors of the church with the state government: Two of governor Emilio González Márquez' own sons joined the catholic activists in preventing the pro-gay groups from demonstrating.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Despite washing his hands, Daniel Karam of IMSS under attack for denying gay rights
A couple of days ago, Daniel Karam, head of Mexican Social Security (IMSS), declared IMSS would refuse gay couples access to social security, despite the recent Supreme Court decision that gay couples are constitutional. Karam's reasoning, a hand-washing worthy of a Pontius Pilate, was the following:
The IMSS statutes does not explicitly mention gays, hence, IMSS have to wait for Congress to change the statutes.
Karam: "It is not my place to say whether I am in favor or against a change in the law; it is my place to apply it as it is."
This is quite pathetic. Given the salience of the issue and the recent Supreme Court interpretation, as the IMSS statutes stand, one hardly need to engage in institional engineering to interpret that gay couples, who certainly do pay taxes to IMSS, should have the same rights to e.g. social security, medical attention, or kindergarten services that straight couples are entitled to, in case of the death of a IMSS-registered partner.
(as gays are not mentioned in the IMSS charter, does that mean they do not have to pay IMSS contributions either?)
Regardless, health secretary Ángel Córdova Villalobos, a possible presidential contender, responded favorably to "initiating a debate" on the issue. Already, one IMSS client has filed an injunction against IMSS for its refusal to register her partner. So far only one political party, the PRD, is standing up for equal social rights for gay couples .
The IMSS statutes does not explicitly mention gays, hence, IMSS have to wait for Congress to change the statutes.
Karam: "It is not my place to say whether I am in favor or against a change in the law; it is my place to apply it as it is."
This is quite pathetic. Given the salience of the issue and the recent Supreme Court interpretation, as the IMSS statutes stand, one hardly need to engage in institional engineering to interpret that gay couples, who certainly do pay taxes to IMSS, should have the same rights to e.g. social security, medical attention, or kindergarten services that straight couples are entitled to, in case of the death of a IMSS-registered partner.
(as gays are not mentioned in the IMSS charter, does that mean they do not have to pay IMSS contributions either?)
Regardless, health secretary Ángel Córdova Villalobos, a possible presidential contender, responded favorably to "initiating a debate" on the issue. Already, one IMSS client has filed an injunction against IMSS for its refusal to register her partner. So far only one political party, the PRD, is standing up for equal social rights for gay couples .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)