Last year on November 22, this was published in Federation’s official journal A compromise, moreover, interesting and worrying. Interesting because it deals with the core infrastructure functions of the current federal administration and which are clearly a priority for national development, citing the above agreement.
This makes some sense in the logic of governments and legacies who want to be left to be remembered for their actions later, under the formula that words are not facts.
These views on the priority nature and impact of such actions on national development are entirely at the discretion of the Federal Public Administration, with agencies and institutions solely responsible for assessing whether, in fact, the current government’s major projects are such. meets expectations. ,
What is of concern is that all information relating to these projects is intended to be classified in advance as reserved for national security.
INAI has an institutional mission to protect the fundamental right to access public information. As per an amendment to the Constitution in February 2014, the constitutional control and legal norms to protect this human right were given the necessary legitimacy to intervene against acts of authority and mechanisms that seek to undermine it.
In a more specific manner, INAI decided in December 2021 to file a constitutional dispute – thus, with all its capital letters – against the agreement. The aim is to maintain the characteristics of the democratic state that Mexico seeks, and transparency and access to information are the pillars of this democratic structure.
With this contention, INAI wants the country’s highest court to define the scope of this agreement, which creates a precarious and ambiguous situation that leads to a well-established fear of additional powers leading to loss of transparency and access to information. guesses.
The fear is well-founded: how does obscurity help speed up the work processes of government infrastructure? Is there a need for national security to accelerate?
It should not be forgotten that the rules of the democratic game are in the constitution and are nothing more than a complex mechanism of checks and balances.
As citizens and as an institution, we want the government to achieve goals that benefit the country and Mexican society. But for that it is necessary to tell what the government is doing.
If they are major works of a six-year term, why not publicize them? Perhaps it is not a right enshrined in the Constitution to seek information about public works. Obviously it is.
Federal public administration agencies and institutions are between a rock and a hard place: abide by the constitution and grant access to information or comply with administrative agreements, deny information in advance and in the usual manner on government public works projects Do it.
Democratic reality cannot be deconfigured or changed through decree. This is not a new suit to suit the king, as the classic story tells with morality.
The Constitution identifies all of us, officials and citizens, institutions and society, to the limits for some and the rights of others, to escape the scourge that public power can create. It is the guideline that allows in any state that the desire for power or freedom does not overflow. It measures the areas of potential of public power and limits the areas of freedom of individuals.
And for this reason, INAI is confident that the nation’s Supreme Court will achieve an egalitarian assessment between the government’s legal actions in matters of public affairs and the fundamental rights of all Mexicans.