Notes for a Constitution I

© Provided by El Universal Online

Notes for a Constitution I

February 5th marked the fifth anniversary of the publication of the first Political Constitution of Mexico City, which was prepared by 100 constituent deputies who formed a heterogeneous group made up of lawyers, economists, social leaders, activists, actors and communicologists, among whom, guided by the need to distribute, the drafting commissions were assigned without rhyme or reason —to As an example, today the spokesman for the Presidency of the Republic presided over the commission on “Original Towns and Neighborhoods and Resident Indigenous Communities”—. Of that hundred constituents, almost half today sympathize with MORENA, including dissident PAN members such as Gabriela Cuevas.

From the beginning of the work of this peculiar group of legislators, their identity and nationalist stink might be perceived, which today guides the destinies of Mexican public life. In this vein, the capital’s magna carta begins with a pompous epigraph attributed to the Mexica leader Ténoch: “As long as the world lasts, it will not end, fame will not perish, the glory of Mexico-Tenochtitlan”.

Thus, all those who intervened in the formation of the highest capital order committed to keep “loyalty to the echo of the old word”, to take care of “our common home”, to restore it through “the laborious work and solidarity of their daughters and sons, the transparency of this region emanating from the water”, protected of course by the halo of being “citizens of integrity and loyalty to the new constitutional order”, and by belonging to the “mirror in which the Republic, worthy capital of all Mexican men and women and universal pride in our roots”. The only reprehensible thing is that they did not use the formula of the Provisional Regulation of the Mexican Empire of 1822 to seal their commitment: “So God help us and be in our defense; if not, he sues us.”

Composed of 71 articles and 39 transitional ones, the capital’s Constitution is not the least articulated among all those in the country —that of Querétaro has 40— nor the largest —that of Chihuahua, 203—, but without a doubt it is the most voluminous in legal nonsense, in rights taken from the sleeve, the least notable for its legislative technique, and the most curious for its peculiar writing style. It abounds with epigraphs of good intentions and high ideological content for each of its articles: “Of the intercultural, multiethnic, multilingual and multicultural nature of the City”, “Educating and knowledge city”, “Solidarity city” or “City safe”.

Our radiant mosaic of good intentions entered into force on September 17, 2018. Despite the time that has passed, there are still renowned jurists who do not distinguish between “council” and “council” or between “mayor’s office” and “territorial demarcation”. Perhaps that is a minor detail when we live in a metropolis where “information professionals have the right to act freely”, “their personal and professional dignity and independence” is safeguarded and “the safety of the people who exercise the journalism; as well as the conditions for those who are arbitrarily persecuted in the exercise of said professional activity”.

The least important thing is to know how many and which of their numerous “human rights” are effectively exercised or what their specific legal consequences have been, for better or for worse. The good thing is that it says such beautiful and unobjectionable things that it is already thinking regarding implementing a popular consultation to confirm that it is the most beautiful in the world, only preceded by the French system.

]]>