Reversed Measure with Claudia Sheinbaum’s “La Esperanza nos Une” Tour
On Monday, October 23, the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judicial Power reversed the agreement of the INE’s Complaints and Reports Commission regarding the “La Esperanza nos Une” campaign.
Following the INE’s decision, Sheinbaum’s team had to remove 33 publications, suspend their “La Esperanza nos Une” tour, and limit their activities to indoor spaces with party members only.
By majority vote, with the dissenting votes of Chief Magistrate Reyes Rodríguez Mondragón and Magistrate Janine Otálora Malassis, and the absence of Magistrate Indalfer Infante, the Superior Court of the Electoral Tribunal found the arguments of Sheinbaum and Morena, who claimed censorship, to be well-founded.
The Electoral Tribunal session was called at the last minute and conducted through a non-public video conference.
During the session, it was determined that the INE’s agreement was not properly justified or motivated, as the Complaints and Reports Commission based its decision on legal provisions that did not apply to this case.
As a result, Claudia Sheinbaum’s “La Esperanza nos Une” tour can continue as it did prior to the sanctions.
“The case was not analyzed in light of the principle of strict application of the law, in its taxative aspect,” resolved the magistrates who voted in favor of the draft judgment prepared by Magistrate Felipe Alfredo Fuente Barrera.
Joining the rapporteur in voting were Magistrate Mónica Aralí Soto Fregoso, Felipe de la Mata Pizaña, and José Luis Vargas Valdez.
Why INE’s Measures Against “La Esperanza nos Une” Were Reversed –
They stated that the precautionary measures imposed by the INE’s Complaints and Reports Commission were disproportionate and believed that the analysis conducted by this administrative authority did not establish a causal relationship, as the legal provisions invoked were unrelated to the imposition of precautionary measures.
They argued that the precautionary measures imposed by the INE’s Complaints and Reports Commission violated constitutional principles set forth in Articles 1, 6, and 7 of the Constitution.
They placed strong emphasis on freedom of expression, freedom to express ideas, and the right to information.
“The responsible authority was negligent in conducting a true preliminary evaluation of the case to justify the suitability, reasonableness, and proportionality of the precautionary measures,” they added.
Furthermore, they believed that the INE’s Complaints and Reports Commission conducted an improper analysis of the possible commission of early campaign acts by Sheinbaum.
Additionally, it was established that the events that led to the imposition of precautionary measures did not have a proselytizing character.
Following the TEPJF’s decision, made on the night of October 23, the member of the Ecologist Green Party (PVEM), Jorge Álvarez Máynez, posted a message on his social media warning that “Claudia Sheinbaum is building an early fraud.”
