AMLO’s Plan B could be ratified by the SCJN (Photo: Cuartoscuro)
Both the National Action Party (PAN) and the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) presented, before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN), a constitutional dispute against Plan B of the Electoral Reform promoted by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), this by considering some clauses of the reform package approved by Morena and his allies in the Union Congress contrary to the Magna Carta.
Loret de Mola attacked AMLO’s measures in view of the 2024 elections: “Tyrannical flirtation”
The journalist has assured that the president would have incurred various “undemocratic attitudes”
On the morning of this Monday, January 23, the opposition parties went before the highest judicial authority in Mexico to point out that the modifications to the General Law of Social Communication (LGCS) and the General Law of Administrative Responsibilities (LGRA) contravene the Constitution Policy of the United Mexican States (CPEUM), which unleashed a discussion on whether or not they could have provenance in the First Chamber of the Court.
To broaden the panorama of what happened this Monday in the Court, it must be specified that this institution has 90 days to determine whether or not the controversy presented by the members of the Va por México coalition is appropriate; In that period, the magistrates must endorse both sides of what was postulated in AMLO’s Electoral Reform, one that defends freedom of expression and another that accuses debauchery of speech during the electoral period.
The ACTION OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY has already been presented before the @SCJN for the crafty and destructive “Plan B” of Electoral Reform where the president @lopezobrador_ He intends to attack opponents under the protection of “freedom of expression.”
To continue defending DEMOCRACY! pic.twitter.com/AzJQWvw49e
— Mariana Gomez del Campo (@marianagc) January 23, 2023
According to opponents, the initiative approved by the National Regeneration Movement (Morena) and its allies (PT, PVEM and PES [sólo en el Senado]) allow public servants to disseminate government achievements outside the established times and “attack opponents protected by the supposed freedom of expression”, in addition to limiting the publicity of states and municipalities, for which they ruled that what is really sought is “to end the INE”.
“Authoritarian winds are blowing”: Lorenzo Córdova warned about the risk to Mexican democracy
The electoral adviser warned of the attacks on democracy, because “we saw it in the US a couple of years ago, we just saw it in Brazil”
The opposition faction has reiterated that it is an initiative so that any of AMLO’s so-called “corcholatas” (Ebrard, López and Sheinbaum) win the 2024 presidential elections; However, when reading the text approved by deputies and senators, it is found that it does not contradict the Constitution, at least not as indicated by Margarita Gómez del Campo in a video that she posted on social networks.
The constitutional article that regulates the General Law of Social Communication is 134, in reference to this matter it says: “Propaganda, under any modality of social communication […] It must be of an institutional nature and for informative, educational or socially oriented purposes. In no case will this propaganda include names, images, voices or symbols that imply personalized promotion of any public servant. And the text of the Electoral Reform, in the LGCS states verbatim that:
Today we present to the @SCJN an action of unconstitutionality against the electoral reform approved by Morena, which threatens democracy and our institutions.
We demand that the Constitution be respected and that @lopezobrador_ don’t want to impose your rules by way. pic.twitter.com/bCwOsD9cpr
— Marko Cortés (@MarkoCortes) January 23, 2023
Article 9.- It is prohibited to disseminate Social Communication Campaigns:
Lorenzo Córdova prepares the INE for the Electoral Reform to come into operation
The president counselor pointed out that the Institute will create a report summarizing the impacts of AMLO’s Plan B
I. Whose content:
a) Its purpose is to highlight, in a personalized way, names, images, voices or symbols of any public servant, with the exception of the provisions of article 14 of this Law;…
d) Induce confusion by using the symbols, ideas, expressions, designs or images used by any political or social organization;
e) Present as information for journalistic purposes mentions, notes, interviews or images paid for with public resources, and
f) It is aimed at influencing the competition between political parties, or pre-candidates or candidates, during electoral and non-electoral periods.
AMLO’s Plan B can wage the first constitutional controversy of the opposition (Photo: Courtesy / Presidency)
Regarding the alleged attacks that Gómez del Campo said that opponents would theoretically be subjected to, it refers to the fact that Article 10 says: “For no reason can the content of Social Communication disseminated by Public Entities include messages that imply an attack to morality, private life or the rights of third parties, provoke a crime, or disturb public order”.
Finally, the CPEUM does not define the electoral times, since this is in the General Law of Electoral Institutions and Procedures (LGIPE), therefore, in constitutional matters, what was revealed in the media and social networks by the PAN and PRD would not be enough. for the SCJN to declare as contrary to the Magna Carta; however, if in the official document of the controversy there is some undisclosed consideration, the determination of the Court could be different.
Political trial of Yasmín Esquivel: when will they be able to submit the magistrate to this process AMLO accused the UNAM of not giving concrete actions in the case of plagiarism of Yasmín Esquivel: “Pure dizzying wool” Va por México filed an unconstitutionality action before the SCJN against AMLO’s electoral plan B
Leave a Reply