In Mexico, AMLO’s provocations could quickly kill opponents

In the winter of 1170, King Henry II was enraged when Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, expelled many of his loyal bishops from his castle in Normandy. He is said to have exclaimed: “Will no one relieve me of this pesky priest?” On hearing this, the four knights went to Canterbury, where Becket was killed. When the subsequent scandal broke, Henry insisted that his statement had been misinterpreted. He didn’t mean it as a matter of course.

A similar story is currently unfolding in Mexico. From the National Palace, the President Andrés Manuel López ObradorHe is not yet an absolute ruler, but aspires to be one, and resents his critics, almost all of whom Journalists, writers and intellectuals. He routinely issues public statements condemning them, and doesn’t hesitate to give people’s full names in statements that could easily be “misunderstood.” He has done it countless times in front of millions of viewers.

López Obrador hosts a show “morning”, which can be translated as “early rise”. It aired on December 3, 2018, two days after his inauguration. From 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. daily, five days a week, the President is a Fake press conference, very few freelance journalists could attend or speak. The president’s spokesman also rarely speaks, instead preparing questions and distributing them to trusted journalists. AMLO is speaking.

His speeches are full of ad hominem attacks. Five years ago, the writer Gabriel Zide Compiled by A A list of insults López Obrador against anyone who wants to discredit him. At that time, list no 80. Today, of course it is longer.

López Obrador engages in slander and defamation. His detractors are part of a conspiracy to overthrow him. youAll his critics are corrupt, driven only by material interests. He often refers to his critics “Enemies of the people” and display your personal information publicly (Tax documents, properties, photos, videos) Disclose their income and indicate that it was obtained through discredited means.

Among the group of critics who are considered “enemies”, I am one of the most attacked. To date, I have been referred to as insulting, slanderous, and slanderous 298 times. Although I have been an outspoken critic of all Mexican governments since the 1970s, AMLO has accused me of conspiring to sell out to these previous governments and return to power.

López Obrador has hated me ever since I publicly criticized him a month before the 2006 election (he lost by 0.58 percent). He accused her of “wanting to crush the people” and “doing great harm to Mexico.” He accused her of “plotting” to overthrow him. I asked the President of the United States, Joe Biden, to name an ambassador (presumably me) to lead a plot to “intervene in Mexico.” Some time ago, he urged the public to find out my home address so he could reveal it to the media.

The President is following it Their attacks are legally unobjectionable. Under Mexican law, public figures can expect to be subject to greater scrutiny than private citizens. This study can be harsh, aggressive, and offensive. The acceptable range of scrutiny should be directly proportional to the person’s relevance in public life. López Obrador’s problematic critics are all public figures. So, the president reasons, it’s all fair game.

But the Act is meant to protect free speech and not license the government to stifle it. The president personally attacks his critics from the seat of executive power, using public money to do so. Their messages and attacks are an integral part of official communications and government broadcasts, which proliferate exponentially on social networks. López Obrador’s persecution is aimed at preventing freedom.

Are there legal means of appeal? In theory, yes. In practice, no. One aspect of the Mexican constitution that has long been a source of pride is the “amparo,” or protective resource, that protects the people against abuses of government power. If the victims demand this, we can point to the violation of many human rights enshrined in our Constitution: due process and judicial guarantees, privacy, freedom of expression, the right to air one’s views and the right to reply.

But the President did not honor these safeguards.

Then we can turn to the National Commission for Human Rights (CNDH) and, in turn, send our cases to international institutions that can create some form of protection. But in practice this commission is completely subordinate to the government. Even if an international body gives a favorable verdict, the President will not comply.

In the eyes of the world, López Obrador leads us down the path to a one-party state under the control of one man. The reason for freedom is to prevent any attempt to end democracy. We pesky critics never tire of pointing this out.

López Obrador said watching journalist Ciro Gomez Leiva’s work could give you a “brain tumor.” In the same week, there was an assassination attempt on the anchor and news anchor. The people behind this effort have never been found, and in all likelihood never will be. The president declared, “It could have been a self-inflicted attack, not because he discovered it, but because somebody made us vulnerable.”

It may only be a matter of time before one of López Obrador’s critics is assassinated. The President would then say that it was all a conspiracy to bring him down. Or, like King Henry II, you can say it’s all “a misunderstanding.”