Introduction
The assassination of Carlos Manzo, the mayor of Uruapan, has once again prompted the government to utter its standard response: “we will go to the very end, whoever may fall; this crime will not remain unpunished.” The familiar slogan, “In Mexico, the rule of law prevails,” begs the question: does a genuine state of law truly exist in Mexico? Let’s investigate.
Beyond Compliance: The True Essence of a State of Law
A genuine state of law extends far beyond mere adherence to laws. In Mexico, we are painfully distant from this ideal. Impunity rates hover around 95% for common law offenses, with similarly high impunity rates in federal offenses. Delinquents weigh the benefits of their actions against expected costs, and it is in this latter aspect that the high impunity rates originate.
The Cost of Delinquency
Delinquents assess the benefits of their actions, which may not always be monetary, against anticipated costs. The cost of delinquency depends on the penalty (corporal or financial) and the probability of facing it. This probability, in turn, depends on several factors: being detected, reported to the public prosecutor’s office, pursued, captured, having a solid investigative file to support the accusation, presented before a judge, and ultimately, being convicted.
Since each of these probabilities is less than one, the combined probability of facing punishment approaches zero. Consequently, the severity of penalties becomes irrelevant if these probabilities are minuscule. Delinquents have learned from experience that two weak links exist in this chain: being reported and the public prosecutor’s office effectively carrying out its duties. Without addressing this latter issue, reducing impunity and delinquency remains impossible.
Beyond Crime: Weakening Elements of a State of Law
Let’s move beyond crime and examine how the current regime has further eroded other components of a comprehensive state of law. The government, across its three branches, has abdicated from its primary responsibility to protect individuals and their property against third-party acts of violence, including government actions.
1. Property Rights
Private property rights must be clearly defined in the legal framework and protected by an independent and impartial judiciary, especially when government actions threaten them. In Mexico, private property rights are inadequately defined in the constitutional Article 27. Moreover, judicial reform has de facto stripped the Federal Judiciary of its independence and increased uncertainty about its impartiality, particularly when one party is the government itself.
Additionally, the amendment to the Amparo Law leaves private agents vulnerable against government actions violating their individual constitutional rights. This has undoubtedly weakened the rule of law.
2. Institutional Arrangement
An institutional framework should ensure equal opportunities for accessing various markets of goods, services, and production factors within a competitive context. The dissolution of the Federal Competition Commission (Cofece) and the Federal Telecommunications Institute (IFT), along with transferring their functions to federal government dependencies, has weakened efforts to promote competitive markets and penalize monopolistic practices.
Simultaneously, this arrangement has increased the likelihood of government favoritism towards such practices for favored agents at the expense of consumers, as seen with shoe producers and preferential treatment for Pemex and CFE over private energy producers.
3. Tax Compliance
A significant portion of private economic agents, both businesses and workers, operate in the informal economy and do not contribute to government revenues. Their non-compliance does not incur any penalties.
4. Access to Quality Public Services
Regarding access to quality public services, such as education, the government opted to favor teachers’ unions at the expense of educational quality following the 2013 educational reform’s abrogation. This, combined with the “new Mexican school” model, disadvantages public school graduates compared to private school graduates when entering the labor market, violating the principle of equal opportunities.
Conclusion: The Consequences of a Weakened State of Law
These examples illustrate that we are increasingly distant from having a comprehensive state of law. The consequence will be a lower level of development and well-being.
Key Questions and Answers
- Q: What does a genuine state of law entail? A: It goes beyond mere adherence to laws, encompassing clear property rights definitions, an independent judiciary, equal market access, institutional integrity, tax compliance, and quality public services.
- Q: How does impunity affect the rule of law in Mexico? A: High impunity rates (95% for common law offenses and federal offenses) indicate a significant gap between the ideal state of law and reality in Mexico.
- Q: How have recent changes weakened the state of law in Mexico? A: Judicial reform has undermined the Federal Judiciary’s independence, the dissolution of competition commissions has hampered market competitiveness, tax evasion remains unpunished for many, and educational reforms have compromised equal opportunities.
- Q: What are the consequences of a weakened state of law? A: The consequence will be a lower level of development and well-being.
