Introduction
The recent interview of Ernesto Zedillo with Spanish deputy Cayetana Álvarez de Toledo, published in the conservative and neoliberal Madrid-based newspaper El Mundo, has reignited the debate on Mexico’s democracy. Zedillo, a former PRI president who won the presidency following the assassination of Luis Donaldo Colosio, warned that Mexico is experiencing “the end of its democracy.”
Sheinbaum’s Response and the Current State of Democracy
In response, Claudia Sheinbaum, the current head of government in Mexico City, stated that the country is going through “the moment of greatest democracy and freedom.” She emphasized that the three powers are currently chosen through elections, and her administration does not suppress any voices. Sheinbaum’s argument is clear: democratic legitimacy lies in the ballot boxes, and the people hold the power.
However, democracy extends beyond voting; it also depends on robust institutions and effective checks and balances.
Zedillo’s Criticism vs. Historical Context
Zedillo accuses the current president of concentrating power, manipulating institutions, and weakening checks and balances. He seems to overlook the historical concentration of power in the presidency, the weakness of institutions, and the rare effectiveness of checks and balances in Mexico. Moreover, Zedillo’s moral authority is questionable, as his own government embodied the very aspects he now condemns. During his term, he maintained presidential control over judicial appointments, defended institutional autonomy while keeping the Judicial Power subordinate, and never fully removed presidential influence over the Bank of Mexico or the National Human Rights Commission.
Partisan Hegemony and Media Control
Zedillo criticizes partisan hegemony, yet his PRI continued to control governorships, municipalities, legislatures, unions, media outlets, and budgets. During his administration, there was control over information and censorship, with the press dependent on official advertising and federal concessions. Today, however, media outlets criticize freely, and informational plurality is significantly greater than 25 years ago.
Assessing Mexico’s Current Democratic Landscape
Sheinbaum is correct in pointing out Mexico’s unprecedented openness regarding freedoms, especially expression and electoral competition. Nevertheless, this freedom is not equally distributed across the country; in many regions, local caudillos, municipal presidents, and governors still operate outside the democratic spirit she describes. Institutionally, independent judiciary and effective checks and balances remain tasks to be accomplished, while political polarization restricts dialogue and impoverishes public debate.
Zedillo’s Democratic Legacy and Contradictions
Zedillo demands transparency but his administration supported Fobaproa, a bailout that shifted private losses to the public treasury and was executed opaquely. He claimed to consolidate democracy through the 1996 reforms, yet clientelism and prist control persisted in the states. His government was technocratic, with an elite view of power, making crucial decisions among a small group without open deliberation.
Even in human rights, Zedillo’s legacy is gloomy: the 1997 Acteal massacre remains a symbol of impunity.
Key Questions and Answers
- Question: Is Mexico’s democracy in crisis, as Zedillo suggests?
- Question: How does Sheinbaum defend Mexico’s current democratic state?
- Question: What are the historical contexts surrounding Zedillo’s criticisms?
- Question: What is the current state of Mexico’s democracy?
Answer: While Zedillo exaggerates the democratic crisis, Mexico’s democracy does face challenges, including fragile checks and balances and regional disparities in democratic practices.
Answer: Sheinbaum asserts that Mexico is experiencing its greatest democratic freedom, emphasizing free and fair elections and increased freedoms. However, she acknowledges the need for stronger institutions and more effective checks and balances.
Answer: Zedillo’s criticisms overlook his own administration’s concentration of power, weak institutions, and limited checks and balances. His moral authority is also questionable due to his government’s actions that now draw condemnation.
Answer: Mexico’s democracy has expanded freedoms but struggles with institutional weaknesses and political polarization. While there is progress in electoral competition and expression, challenges remain in ensuring effective checks and balances and equitable distribution of democratic practices.
