Mexican Electoral Politics: the more things change, the more they stay the same

Oaxaca, Mexico—More than a year before the presidential elections, Mexican political parties are using new forms of propaganda based on the manipulation of social discontent. This is an attempt to justify the sliver of democratic credibility achieved in 2000 when the conservative National Action Party (PAN) was able to put a former Coca-Cola executive in the president's office. Thus began the age of “democratic transition” which was celebrated mostly due to the defeat of the PRI, a party that had held uninterrupted power for over 70 years.

With Vicente Fox, began the “marketing” trend in Mexican politics. The concept of being media savvy was something that the “left” (represented by the PRD: Party of the Democratic Revolution) didn't seem to fully grasp in the last election.

Now, there's Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the star of this pre-election season's hit soap opera; “El Desafuero.”

So, what is “desafuero”?

“Fuero” is a legal concept that is fairly common throughout Latin America - the immunity from criminal prosecution that an official or politician has for the duration of his or her term. “Desafuero” happens when that immunity is lifted, in this case, by Congressional vote. In Mexico, people facing criminal charges cannot run for office.

For those who missed the show, here’s a basic summary:

Mexico City's government, led by Andrés Manuel López Obrador, expropriated a tract of land in a wealthy neighborhood for the purpose of building an access road to a private hospital. A legal dispute ensued with the owner of the property and a judge issued an order to stop the road project. Although construction was eventually halted, López Obrador was accused of contempt-of-court and abuse of authority. These accusations served as the legal basis for removing his “fuero”, thereby making it virtually impossible to campaign for the presidency.

This led to months of verbal sparring via the media between the administration of President Fox and the mayor's office in Mexico City. López Obrador insisted that he was the target of a conspiratorial plot and Fox responded that the executive branch had nothing to do with the charges brought against the mayor by the (supposedly independent) Attorney General's office.

On April 7th—just hours before Congress voted to remove his fuero—López Obrador addressed an audience of between 150,000 and 370,000 people packed into and around the city's main plaza. Saying the “desafuero” was a plot to keep him off of the ballots in 2006, he called upon those gathered to mount a campaign of “peaceful civil resistance” and to participate in a silent, nine kilometer march on April 24th.

Police in the capital estimated that 1.2 million people participated in the April 24th march in Mexico City, making it the largest (and most publicized) demonstration in Mexican history.

Days later, Fox accepted the resignation of his Attorney General, whose office brought the charges against López Obrador in the first place. The AG’s office dropped the charges against Andres Manuel López Obrador on May 4th. The Fox administration is saying that the “desafuero” case is closed.

To those watching from the U.S., this whole situation probably looks like a victory for the left.

In the party politics sense, it probably is.

While López Obrador, a center-left politician, is sometimes described as a “populist”, he is definitely not out the change the system. His platform, or “alternative project for the nation”, is accepted by the economic powers in Mexico, who have expressed that they would have no difficulty working with an AMLO presidential administration. Carlos Slim, Latin America's richest man, collaborated with López Obrador in a “restoration” project that gentrified Mexico City's historic quarter. López Obrador's administration contracted former New York City mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, as a security consultant.

So, is it just that the monied interests and center-left political reformists are out to “democratically share” the social, political, and economic order?

It’s important to note that abstention rates in Mexican elections often hover between 60-70%.

A history of electoral irregularities has plagued Mexico for decades. Perhaps the most notable example being the 1988 presidential election, in which NAFTA proponent Carlos Salinas de Gortari claimed victory in spite of very serious technical difficulties experienced by the computer system used to tally votes.

In this context, Mexico’s Federal Electoral Institute (which, incidentally, assisted with the recent elections in Iraq) has to look for new ways to convince the masses to vote.

The apparent confrontation between the Fox administration and the government of Mexico City has proven very effective in this sense. The great media drama of Executioners vs. Martyrs played out by these two camps galvanized an apathetic electorate and grabbed headlines around the world. The topic has virtually monopolized national news airtime for over a year, allowing controversial legislation to pass unnoticed. After jeopardizing the stability of the country while arguing that the case against Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was necessary to preserve the rule of law and to safeguard the legitimacy of the national institutions, the Fox administration has declared that the case is now closed.

Just like that.

Vladamir Flores works with the Mexico Independent Media Center (mexico.indymedia.org).