Without making a single correction to the opinion, despite the recognition of inconsistencies and contradictions, the ruling bloc in the Chamber of Deputies voted specifically for the reform of the Law of Electoral Institutions and Procedures, necessary for the Senate to issue the call for the election of judges.
In the morning, the coordinator of the Morena bench, Ricardo Monreal, said that they were going to review, “in accordance with the legislative technique and what is appropriate will be done. In other words, we are the Legislative Branch, we are in sessions, in an ordinary legislative period and we can make any modifications and corrections that are considered appropriate, that can be made.”
You may be interested: Mexican diver will lose scholarship for reality show
He expressed that in this law the time to issue the call was not questioned, but he was in communication with the Senate “to see if they have possibilities, in the case of modifying this type of amendments to the opinion, to see if we can achieve it,” which finally it didn’t happen.
The ruling in particular was approved by 342 votes in favor from Morena and its allies from the Green Ecologist Party of Mexico (PVEM) and the Labor Party (PT) and received 128 against from the National Action benches (PAN). , the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the Citizen Movement (MC).
Without making a single correction to the opinion, despite the recognition of inconsistencies and contradictions, the ruling bloc in the Chamber of Deputies voted specifically for the reform of the Law of Electoral Institutions and Procedures, necessary for the Senate to issue the call for the election of judges.
In the morning, the coordinator of the Morena bench, Ricardo Monreal, said that they were going to review, “in accordance with the legislative technique and what is appropriate will be done. In other words, we are the Legislative Branch, we are in sessions, in an ordinary legislative period and we can make any modifications and corrections that are considered appropriate, that can be made.”
He expressed that in this law the time to issue the call was not questioned, but he was in communication with the Senate “to see if they have possibilities, in the case of modifying this type of amendments to the opinion, to see if we can achieve it,” which finally it didn’t happen.
The ruling in particular was approved by 342 votes in favor from Morena and its allies from the Green Ecologist Party of Mexico (PVEM) and the Labor Party (PT) and received 128 against from the National Action benches (PAN). , the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the Citizen Movement (MC).
In the discussion of the reservations, moment of the legislative process to approve changes to the opinion, deputy Emilio Suárez Licona (PRI) explained that article 533 is related to 534 and the document leaves more doubts than answers.
“We had been told that the secondary laws would provide certainty and certainty in the face of the flagrant inconsistencies derived from the Constitutional Reform and nothing could be further from the truth.
“This ruling reconfirms the irresponsibility of a majority that has not fully realized that it may be the most relevant reform in recent years (…) this ruling implies giving cause to an electoral process that will be regulated in light of a concert of discrepancies regulations, operational gaps, structural contradictions that will lead to an institutional crisis to the detriment of the electoral certainty of our democratic system,” he warned.
The PRI member questioned how the opinion will address the operational considerations related to the organization of the election, particularly regarding the design of the electoral geography and the harmonization of the political communication model, or how it intends to prevent and adequately sanction the interference of resources from source. illicit
Suárez Licona recalled that the majority bloc imposed a transitional article that prohibits the interpretation of the reform “and now there is still time to list all the errors in the opinion, from the substantive to the flaws in legislative technique.”
He explained that articles 533 and 534 need to specify that the General Council of the INE is the body that will deliver the certificates of majority and issue the declarations of validity in the election, this with the purpose of safeguarding the collegiate action of the institute in the exercise of its powers, in accordance with the principles of legality and electoral certainty.
Furthermore, the wording of article 534 is repetitive and lends itself to confusion, and it proposed taking into account caregiver judges, in addition to those who are pregnant or breastfeeding, so that they are not considered in the extraordinary process of 2025.
In his speech, the coordinator of the PRI, Rubén Moreira, asked to return the minutes to the Senate and “that they start pulling tomorrow at dawn, tomorrow in the morning, they earn twice as much as us, man, let them get even.”
He explained that article 529 has a contradiction with the constitutional reform of the Judiciary because it states that a mark or entry can be made on the ballot.
“Originally it was to write down the name of the candidate that you want and that the voter wants to be the judge, but here they add it, there in the Senate, here you have no chance, they already told me that you cannot change anything, They add branding.
“The Constitution does not say that and it cannot be interpreted because you put a transition in which you say that there can be no interpretation other than the literal one,” he explained.
The other change that was shown is that in the Senate the proposal for a specialized commission of the upper chamber was eliminated from all articles, but in article 471, paragraph 6, they do not do so.
“Change this and other things that were posted a while ago, like these two identical articles, and let’s send it to the Senate so they can work for a while, take it out on our co-legislator colleagues, and don’t let these aberrations go to the textbooks.” of many students who are going to make fun of us, well, more of you than of us, because they are going to hold us as an example of what it means to legislate without responsibility, of what it means not to do things well,” he stated.