by Josefina Mena-Abraham
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CONGRESS OF THE UNION.
SUBJECT: New NATIONAL SECURITY LAW ;
Mexico City, 24/04/2011
For this tube and in my capacity as a citizen of Mexico, recycling technology inventor, founder of an environmental organization with more than 30 years working in both rural and urban communities in 23 states of the Republic in favor of the environment and quality of life my people, with all the respect you deserve as representatives of the legislative branch, I express our profound disagreement with the new National Security Act.
1) It is shameful lack of political-philosophical argument that purports to justify: the "peace" on, gray and conflict without merit, but rather like a caricature Obama's speech defending the war when he was given the Nobel Peace Prize. The important thing about peace is not the story or its color, but who defines it as such, for what and for whom. In no how we justify the violation of Articles 29 and 129 of the current Constitution that the Federal Executive has been carrying out since the beginning of his administration, with the passivity of the legislative branch that is chosen to defend.
2) the national emergency in which we live today has been generated by a total lack of instruments "political" to confront organized crime. In no case have we seen the Armed Forces defending our daily safety and / or preventing massacres and kidnappings, detention and / or murder of the "bosses" does not alter the general belief, reinforced daily with the pain of 40.000 dead 50.000 orphans. The war of the Federal Executive was not planned, not even the minimal consensus on what would be the criterion for evaluating its success or failure.
3) , includes provisions to enable the armed forces free of civilian control to become a "focal responsible "before" affects the national security. "Would the armed forces and not the Congress who would define the" public peace. " How would you justify the existence and the high cost to our people in the executive, legislative and judicial? Even in Chapter Eight, the law expands the powers of the executive to unilaterally use the armed forces when there is "threat from abroad ". And what did the executive and the armed forces operating in relation to" Fast and Furious "introduced to our country, more than 2.000 weapons by a foreign government? Shamefully anything.
4) Article 74 VIII on the intervention of the Armed Forces in the suppression of "actions related to movements or conflicts of a political, electoral or social nature" when they constitute a "challenge" or "threat to the country" violates the permanence or existence of the Mexican State. An example is the "Michoacanazo" from 2009 before the elections, where no evidence or any method, is accused of complicity mayors of Michoacán to organized crime and years after they released "for lack of evidence" thus proving that the PGR is an instrument of political persecution, indeed is awarded to one of its authors, Marisela Morales as head of the PGR.
5) The policy in its original conception, it has to do with who has the power and WHY. When we elect you as our representatives gave them the power to legislate for Nostra @ Mexican @ s s. And when the people who elected them are asking for NO MORE BLOOD, BASTA YA! and you do not listen, and quite the contrary pass a law like this not be forced to ask them to resign because a people can not be "governed" by those who have no power to defend it, claiming the Republic as the basis of the Social Pact that unites us.
0 comments:
Post a Comment