The clock is ticking for the corrupt
The Supreme Court has just dealt a low blow to the anti-corruption fight. It resolved that the crime of embezzlement—that nice euphemism for stealing public money— does expire over time. Unlike, of course, crimes such as forced disappearance, which cannot be prescribed.
“It is not possible for a governed person to remain indefinitely in uncertainty,” said Minister Figueroa Mejía.
Translation: if the State is slow to investigate its own embezzlements, it is better to forget about it. The decision overturned an article of the Colima Penal Code that established the opposite.
The case that changed everything
This didn’t come out of nowhere. It comes from an amparo promoted by Yulenny Cortés León, former mayor of Villa de Álvarez, and her former treasurer. Both are in prison for diverting 25 million pesos between 2017 and 2018. Their legal defense found the perfect loophole.
Six ministers against three argued that only crimes of “special gravity”at the international level should be imprescriptible. They recognized that corruption is serious, but not that serious. Embezzlement, according to them, does not reach that level.
They warned that maintaining imprescriptibility could lend itself to “political revenge.”
Because of course, the dangerous thing is to persecute the corrupt, not the corruption itself. The irony is so dense that it could be cut with a knife.
What does this really mean?
The Court sets a dangerous precedent. It draws an arbitrary line between which crimes deserve eternal justice and which can expire like yogurt in the fridge. Stealing from an entire town now has an expiration date.
While the victims of forced disappearance cry out for justice without a time limit, those who empty the public coffers can begin to count the days until their case expires. Legal certainty for some seems to mean guaranteed impunity for others.
The message is clear: investigate quickly or lose the case. And we all know how quickly the system moves against the powerful.
