Mexican justice and its version of events: fiction or reality?
It seems that the Ayotzinapa case, that painful chapter that made us lose the little faith we had left in the institutions, returns to the fore with a twist worthy of a bad Netflix script. A federal court has just ruled that, so far, there is not enough evidence to call the famous (and disputed) “historical truth” false. Yes, the same one that was sold to us in 2015 as if it were a definitive documentary, but that many of us received with the same skepticism as a meme of politicians promising transparency.
And what does this “truth” say? Spoiler: nothing new
For those who lived under a rock (or tried to forget this disaster), the official version maintains that the 43 Ayotzinapa students were kidnapped, murdered and incinerated in a Cocula garbage dump by municipal police in collusion with organized crime. The tests? Well, there’s the detail: confessions obtained under torture, skeletal remains that are impossible to identify, and a narrative with more holes than the plot of Riverdale.
But the court, in its infinite wisdom, ruled that to refute this version, the bodies would have to be found somewhere else. In other words, as if they told you: “Show me that your ex is lying… but without recording their calls.” Convenient, right? Of course, the magistrates admit that the confessions were obtained illegally, but they insist that this does not automatically invalidate the official story. Because, of course, in Mexico justice works like TikTok’s algorithm: no one quite understands how, but what is best for the system always comes out.
And in case anyone expected that international expert reports (such as those of the GIEI or the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team) were the silver bullet, the court dismissed them with an elegant: “Mere expert opinions.” Nothing personal, just judicial bureaucracy.
The message between the lines: “Mexico, a country of legal fiction”
The most ironic thing is that this ruling comes years after another court dismantled the confessions due to torture. Consistency? Never. It seems that here each judge interprets the law as if it were a spin-off of La Rosa de Guadalupe: same plot, different actors. Of course, the court was careful to say that they are not validating torture (what a relief!), it’s just that… eh, sometimes even lies can coincide with reality. It sounds like an excuse for an unfaithful boyfriend, but in an institutional version.
Meanwhile, the families of the normalistas continue waiting for answers, the accused officials remain free (or with minor charges), and Mexico continues to be that place where justice arrives late, badly or never. But hey, at least we have a new chapter for the endless debate: incompetence, corruption or simply the art of masking impunity?
Did this news outrage you? Share it and join the conversation. And if you want more analysis on how Mexican justice juggles the truth, explore our other content. Spoiler: it doesn’t get better.
