Introduction
The president either lacks knowledge or chooses to ignore how the US and Mexican justice systems operate. Both systems uphold the principle of presumption of innocence, meaning an individual is considered guilty only when a judge or jury declares them so. However, the systems aim for different outcomes regarding the supposedly guilty party.
US Justice System vs. Mexican Justice System
In the US, the focus is on resolving the conflict presented in the trial or social context within penal law. Conversely, Mexican law prioritizes uncovering the truth about what actually transpired, making material evidence crucial.
The US system penalizes lying (perjury) severely, with immediate imprisonment and high penalties in years of jail time and substantial fines. In contrast, Mexico emphasizes how and why evidence was obtained to prove a truth.
When evidence is acquired fraudulently or inappropriately, such as through torture, the investigation and trial lose validity.
President’s Misinterpretation of US Justice System
The president incorrectly sentences that statements made by Ovidio or El Mayo Zambada should be proven, as the US system considers such statements as evidence. If multiple witnesses agree on a similar version, it would be sufficient to incriminate the accused.
Moreover, the president’s claim that the US lies about not negotiating with terrorists while dealing with drug cartels, like the Sinaloa Cartel, demonstrates a lack of understanding of both the problem and the system.
The US engages with cartels not to negotiate but to ensure their associates are apprehended and the drug trafficking network dismantled, which affects their country.
Potential Consequences of the President’s Stance
If the president’s stance stems from ignorance, it is problematic. Worse, if she aims to avoid future complications arising from protected witness testimonies that implicate individuals associated with her movement, the situation would be dire.
Having figures like García Luna, who has nothing left to lose, and the Loera family, along with numerous others possessing information and connections to politicians and members of the Fourth Transformation, could set a dangerous precedent.
This scenario would provide the US with leverage in negotiations against Mexico, with unforeseeable consequences.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the main issue? The president’s misunderstanding of how the US and Mexican justice systems function, particularly regarding the treatment of evidence and witness testimonies.
- Why is the US system’s focus on resolving conflicts different from Mexico’s? The US prioritizes penal law and conflict resolution, while Mexico emphasizes uncovering the truth through material evidence.
- What are the consequences of the president’s stance? It could lead to dangerous precedents and provide the US with unforeseen leverage against Mexico, potentially impacting bilateral relations.
