Structural Measures Against Corruption in the Michoacán Prosecutor’s Office
The Attorney General of the State of Michoacán, Carlos Torres Piña, has issued a mandatory directive that strictly prohibits all staff assigned to the State Attorney General’s Office (FGE) from requesting or demanding, for themselves or a third party, any type of illicit commission, gift or consideration, whether in cash or in kind, to victims of crimes, offended parties or their legal representatives. This provision, established in Circular 5/2025 dated August 25, has the fundamental objective of guaranteeing that all procedures inherent to criminal procedures are carried out completely free, eliminating economic barriers that have historically violated access to justice.
The instruction is framed in strict adherence to the guiding principles of the institution: legal certainty, impartiality, legality, objectivity, honesty, gratuitousness, non-revictimization and, primarily, unrestricted respect for Human Rights. Failure to comply with these guidelines will not be tolerated and will entail severe administrative consequences, for which immediate attention will be given to the Internal Affairs Prosecutor’s Office or the FGE Comptroller’s Office, organizations in charge of monitoring and disciplinary sanctions.
Scope of the Prohibition and Specific Procedures
The circular issued by Torres Piña meticulously details the areas of action where any request for remuneration is prohibited. This supervision extends to all unit heads, who are responsible for monitoring compliance within their areas of assignment. The specific procedures mentioned include, but are not limited to, the receipt of complaints or complaints, the issuance of official certificates and the performance of any other procedure related to the substantive functions of this ministerial institution.
Likewise, the prohibition covers the delivery of insured vehicles and other objects that have been retained because they are linked to the commission of an illegal act, for the development of a criminal investigation technique or due to land traffic events, when their legal return is appropriate. In the same way, it applies to the restitution of properties that were insured during an investigation, once the legal lifting of the measure has been determined and the legitimate accreditation of rights by the owner or possessor has been verified. An extremely sensitive aspect also included is the delivery of corpses or human remains, requested by indirect victims or those who can prove a legitimate filial relationship.
Prohibition of Checkpoints and Coordinated Actions
In a parallel movement of great significance, Prosecutor Carlos Torres Piña issued a second directive, Circular 3/2025, through which he absolutely prohibits operational personnel — made up of Public Ministries, Investigation Police and Experts — from installing checkpoints or control posts, commonly known as “checkpoints”, at any point in the state’s geography. This practice, frequently associated with acts of extortion against the population and motorists, is formally suppressed.
The provision clarifies that this prohibition does not prevent the participation of FGE personnel in investigative actions due to objective reasonable suspicion, flagrante detentions, in urgent cases, or when the aim is to prevent the commission of a crime or rescue a victim, all in strict compliance with the National Code of Criminal Procedures. The new policy establishes that intervention in provisional preventive controls will only be carried out in a joint and coordinated manner with the public security institutions of the three levels of government, the National Guard and military personnel, and exclusively when this is agreed upon within the security tables established for this purpose.
These measures represent a significant structural change in the operations of the Michoacán Prosecutor’s Office. They are not limited to a mere declaration of intent, but rather establish a precise framework for action and outline concrete consequences for its violation. They reflect a deliberate strategy to disassociate the institution from entrenched corrupt practices, seeking to restore citizen trust through a transparent, free and professional service, while redefining field operation protocols to prioritize inter-institutional coordination over isolated and potentially arbitrary actions.
Do you value these initiatives to combat corruption and improve security?Share this analysis on your social networks to encourage informed discussion and explore more content related to the transformation of justice institutions in our country.
