No to emptying the polls – El Sol de México
The duties of a citizen of the Republic are: …
Third. Voting in elections and popular consultations
and mandate abolitions,
in the conditions laid down by law.”
(Article 36, CPEUM)
Yes, I have no doubt that there may be good reasons for those asking to leave the polls empty on April 10. However, I don’t share it with them and I will explain why.
We still live in a democracy and direct democracy includes various mechanisms. One of them, abolition of mandate, which is the most controversial, least acceptable, and therefore rarely implemented in the world, which pursues the same goal of impeachment, but differs from it in three respects: while in the former, charges are filed, due process is lifted and it is the highest legislative body It was decided, in delegating, the mechanism used is the electoral process, and who decides is the citizen himself and what is at stake is the loss of confidence in a president.
In December 2019, he pointed out in the same editorial space that figures in our history such as the necromancer, Rafael Nieto, Vicente Lombardo Toledano, and especially Felipe Carrillo Puerto, were the promoters of this number, so much so that in Yucatan in 1923, Carrillo Puerto had issued the first A “Law to Abolish Public Mandates,” with ephemeral validity, provided that it operates when the president ceases to comply with the obligations imposed, because he has apparently ceased to “feel and think” as an actress. However, I decided that this power would only be for the citizens who elected the official.
A century later, Mexican citizens will for the first time participate in the process of repealing the head of the federal executive branch. to meet? That the impeachment process is open to all voting citizens, but there are deep concerns, to the point that the majority sector of the same popular representatives in the federal legislature have carried out unprecedented legal assaults, while a large section of the opposition is promoting an intense electoral abstention. Active abstention is based not only on the economic cost of the electoral exercise (which has already been spent, whether you vote or not, and will not be undone), but especially on the unwillingness to “repeat” similar exercises that took place in sister countries and whose results were abhorrent. However, there are two basic elements to highlight: Mexico has its own structural and ideological characteristics, and the organizer of the process is the National Electoral Institute, which makes the big difference between them.
Personally, I think stopping the voting on April 10 is the least assertive way to participate for all those who might be against continuity in the top office. A lack of voting would make it possible, as it is firmly established, for decisions to be made by a minority–regardless of the fact that they open up spaces filled with dark matter–and, far from leaving the chief promoter of exercise alone, would leave the fate of the nation to its own.
I do not intend to incite the voices of citizens who honor me as readers to any sense. I only intend to stimulate deep thinking so that the decision made is conscious, because regardless of the outcome, if we do not go to the polls, we will morally have no moral authority after the decisions made by the minority. In order for a citizen to be able to claim, he must comply. You have the right to vote, as provided for in the first section of Article 35 of the Constitution (the article of which section IX is regulated by the Federal Law for the Abolition of Mandates [LFR] Public order and federal obligation, promulgated by the Chief of the Federal Executive on September 13, 2019), but above all it is our duty as Mexican citizens to vote in the process of delegating, in accordance with the order of December 20 of 2019, Section III of Article 36 of the Magna Carta.
Therefore, stopping the vote is not only a convenient way to go, it is also a non-national way of responding to the nation. The question would be, in accordance with Article 19, Section V, of the LFRM: Do you agree to revoke his term of office for the President of the United Mexican States due to loss of confidence or to remain in the Presidency of the Republic until the expiration of your term of office? The answer, by choosing between yes or no, can only be done by a real citizen. The decision to abstain is chosen by those who prefer to see history pass before their eyes, fixed in the amorphous and indifferent mass that allows itself to be a prey to fear. Thus, we cannot forget that annulment is an opportunity to confirm or correct a decision previously taken at the ballot box.
Democracy dies as abstention is enabled. Leaving the polls empty on April 10, in addition to being a breach of our civic obligations, would be an act of cowardice that would help stifle the social will, and perhaps amount to an honorable coup against our nation’s popular sovereignty.
[email protected]\u0009\u0009\[email protected]
“Reader. Beer practitioner. Web expert. Subtly charming travel geek. Friendly music specialist.”