MC accuses the distribution of plurinominals, a “fraud against democracy”

Mexico City. After the presentation of the sixth government report of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to the Chamber of Deputies, the Movimiento Ciudadano benches in the Congress of the Union claimed that the “distortion of the electoral rules granted an artificial qualified majority to someone who did not deserve it.” When presenting the position of this party, Senator Clemente Castañeda asserted that the distribution of plurinominal spaces was “illegitimate and is a fraud to democracy.”

“We began this Legislature with a majority effectively won at the polls, the result of a deeply unfair electoral contest, and which has now been artificially and unconstitutionally inflated thanks to a model that allows the arrangement of the party leadership to be above the popular will,” he added.

Movimiento Ciudadano was the first party to present its position after the government report was delivered moments earlier by the Secretary of the Interior, Luisa María Alcalde.

The legislator acknowledged that during the six-year term that is about to end there was progress in labor policy and an increase in the minimum wage, advanced legislation on gender equality and an expansion and constitutionalization of social programs that, he said, MC supported.

However, he questioned whether such advances were sufficient for a “true transformation of public life.”

During his speech, which he delivered almost entirely to the cries of reproach from the Morena supporters, Castañeda stated that the failed security strategy of the last two six-year terms continued and deepened with “the militarization of the country and peace was not achieved.”

Furthermore, “corruption did not end, but the margins of opacity and discretion were expanded”, while “the public health system was destroyed with tragic consequences” and considered that poverty was profited from and the victims were turned their backs on.

“In terms of results, the neoliberal model is not far behind: more inequality, more militarization, more violence, more polarization, more environmental devastation, less exercise of rights, and even stigmatization of protest, criticism and dissent, such as that of the thousands of young people who, by the way, today marched against the so-called judicial reform,” he said.

Meanwhile, adding that Mexicans elected a president of the Republic who represents the continuity of the current government, he noted that “the popular will expressed on June 2 was not to make invisible, much less eliminate political plurality in order to move towards a single, monochrome vision of the country. In a democracy, majority power does not mean power without limits.”

In the discussion of constitutional reforms, including that of the Judiciary, he called for real reflection, without pretense, and not a matter of procedure or order.

“The insistence on finishing militarizing public security without a vision of the State that considers civil security institutions is worrying, compromising the future of entire communities that are under siege by organized crime. The addiction to pretrial detention without trial is worrying, as a magic solution to all the problems of criminality, when not a single effort has been made to improve our system of investigation, intelligence and administration of justice. It is worrying that from a primary vision they try to destroy autonomous organisms, without thinking about the consequences that this has on the exercise of human rights,” continued the member of the MC.

And he concluded by saying that these reforms will condition the future of the federal administration that is about to begin. “Because yes, yes, there is concern that they want to make the next government responsible for the failures of the current one. I take responsibility for my words, but if these reforms succeed we would be about to witness the destruction of democracy from within democracy itself, the inauguration of a constitutional autocracy.”

Amid cries of disapproval from the parliamentary rostrum, he concluded: “Even if they shout a lot, we are not afraid of them. We are not afraid to defend what we believe in, nor to confront or refute those in power.”