It seems that in the Chamber of Deputies they have discovered the wheel… for the third time. Either that, or they have an almost artistic fixation with modifying the same constitutional articles over and over again, as if it were a draft that is never perfect. In a display of legislative efficiency that leaves us all speechless, the Constitutional Points Commission approved, with 27 votes in favor, five against and the classic abstention of those who do not want to get involved, an opinion that seeks to amend the plan of a previous reform. The goal? Provide the Senate of the Republic and the Permanent Commission with the power to approve the appointments of the senior leaders of the National Guard proposed by the President. Because, of course, what could go wrong by letting the military control the police? It’s such a novel idea!
The opposition raises its voice, or at least tries to be heard
In a plot twist that no one saw coming (no one, except everyone), the deputies of the PRI and PAN voted against. Their argument, wrapped in a cellophane of congruity, is that they already opposed the militarization of security when the National Guard was transferred to the Sedena, and they are not going to change their mind now. How noble, keeping their principles firm as a rock… or like a deputy in his seat.
The deputy Alejandro Domínguez of the PRI released the jewel in the crown: “militarizing security is not correct.” A bold, brave statement and, above all, as timely as an umbrella in a desert. He warned, with the seriousness of a prophet of the apocalypse, that if we continue down this route we will have “fatal results” and the credibility of the institutions will be diminished. Is he referring to the same credibility that disappeared with the members of the Navy accused of stealing fuel? Details, details!
For her part, representative Cristina Márquez of the PAN, with the patience of a saint, pointed out the obvious: modifying the same constitutional article three times in less than a year is not exactly a sign of professional work. Come on, even a law student in final exams plans his essays better. He accused the majority of Morena and its allies of legislating without analyzing, an extreme sport that seems to be in fashion. “The underlying issue here is militarization,” he declared, as if he had just discovered warm water. Bravo.
Criticism from (almost) approval
But not everything was fierce opposition. Representative Laura Hernández from Citizen Movement (MC) gave us the most surreal position of the day: they will vote in favor, but they don’t like it at all. He regretted, with a sigh that can almost be read between the lines, that the Chamber of Deputies has to be correcting “errors and filling a regulatory vacuum” due to the rush to legislate. In other words, they are going to approve something that they consider poorly done because, apparently, correcting the error thoroughly would be too much to ask. Impeccable logic, without a doubt.
He expressed that this constitutional reform shows the consequences of legislating careers, generating “legal autonomies” due to analysis failures. Basically they admitted that the original work was so poor that now they need a patch upon a patch. Doesn’t it remind you of when you try to fix a pothole with a little bit of asphalt and the next day it’s deeper? Life imitates art, and Mexican politics imitates a comedy of errors.
The height of irony is that this whole circus is due to the fact that, in the whirlwind of assigning the National Guard to the Secretariat of National Defense, they “forgot” to include parliamentary control over the appointments. A small oversight, like forgetting to put sugar in your coffee. Overall, how important is it who leads a national security force? Unimportant things.
In short, we are facing a spectacle where the rush to score a political goal has generated a legal mess that they are now trying to resolve more quickly. The militarization of public security continues its course, accompanied by a chorus of complaints that, in the end, seem to come to nothing. Because, let’s be honest, in this country the absurd is often normalized with astonishing speed.
What does the future hold for us? Probably a fourth amendment to the same article next year. Because perseverance is the key to success, or at least, to keeping our illustrious legislators busy.
Are you surprised by this legislative swing? Share this analysis on your social networks and tell us what you think about the evolution of the National Guard. Explore more content related to national politics on our site.
