2024-08-06 20:07:00
MEXICO CITY (apro).- The Superior Audit Office of the Federation (ASF) brought the Rosario Robles case to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) so that it can determine whether to confirm her acquittal or not.
The agency, led by David Colmenares, challenged the resolution issued last April by the Ninth Collegiate Court on Criminal Matters in Mexico City, which confirmed the cancellation of the criminal process against Robles Berlanca for improper exercise of public service.
Related News
The review request has already been accepted by the SCJN and sent to Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá for him to draft the corresponding resolution project, which will later be analyzed and voted on by the First Chamber.
“Forward the file for study to Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá, a member of the First Chamber, and file it here, since the subject matter of the case corresponds to his specialty. With the understanding that it must be physically delivered to the relevant office until it is duly integrated with the required files in this agreement,” stated the Court according to the lists of agreements.
Proceso reported that in this matter, the ASF sought to reactivate the case against Robles, who remained under justified preventive detention for three years at the Santa Martha Acatitla prison, accused by the Attorney General’s Office (FGR) of allegedly doing nothing to prevent the diversion of more than five billion pesos when she headed Sedesol and Sedatu in what is known as the Estafa Maestra (Master Scam).
The case was dismissed in 2023 due to the application of a criterion stating that the acts for which the former Secretary of State was prosecuted are not crimes but administrative offenses, as at the time the FGR claimed they were committed, they were not included in the Federal Penal Code.
After obtaining two rulings confirming this decision, one on appeal and the other on direct amparo, the ASF is seeking for the Court to analyze the case to determine whether it should be reopened or not.
Despite the fact that in the direct amparo, the Ninth Collegiate Court did not rule on the constitutionality of any law because it was not requested by any of the parties, a requirement established by law for the Court to review such matters, the Supreme Court did not disclose the reasons for admitting the review request presented by the ASF.
Future Trends in Public Accountability and Legal Oversight in Mexico
The recent developments surrounding Rosario Robles and the actions of the Auditoría Superior de la Federación (ASF) signify a pivotal moment in Mexico’s approach to public accountability and legal oversight. As the case progresses to the Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación (SCJN), the implications for governance and judicial processes are profound.
One potential trend is the increased scrutiny and reactivation of high-profile cases that touch on public financial management. With the ASF’s move to question the cancellation of Robles’ case, we could witness a renewed emphasis on prosecuting cases related to public funds mismanagement, especially as citizens demand greater transparency from their government officials.
Additionally, this situation may lead to a broader legislative discourse on defining the boundaries between criminal and administrative offenses. The argument that actions taken by former officials during their tenure constitute administrative lapses rather than criminal behavior could initiate a reevaluation of legal frameworks governing public service conduct, potentially leading to reforms that explicitly classify and punish financial misconduct.
The use of the Supreme Court as a venue for resolving these disputes underlines a growing trend towards seeking judicial clarification in politically sensitive cases. As stakeholders push for accountability, the judiciary may find itself increasingly involved in political matters, which could reshape the interaction between the branches of government.
Moreover, the emphasis on constitutional reviews in cases where administrative actions are in question may prompt more appeals and adjustments in how public service is regulated. This can lead to the development of stricter compliance requirements and promote a climate where public officials are held more accountable for their decisions.
As the situation unfolds, Mexico’s legal landscape may become more dynamic, reflecting a society that is increasingly unwilling to accept impunity and where public officials are held to a higher standard of accountability. Observers will be keenly watching to see how the SCJN addresses these issues, as the outcomes may resonate beyond Robles’ case and influence public policy and governance for years to come.