Zaldívar Case: the new electoral storm fits in a legal glass of water

Election time and an anonymous complaint against the former president of the Supreme Court, Arturo Zaldívar, have come to mix these days like a Molotov cocktail, but only until the next one explodes. The matter, which is still legally fragile, has been politicized, yes, by people and others, but perhaps it has not arisen with the intention of undermining the campaign and the experts consulted maintain that, in any case, it will not affect much. Zaldívar has gone almost in the blink of an eye from being a figure in the Judiciary to becoming a politician on the team of the official candidate Claudia Sheinbaum. During his time in the Court he left some grudges, as a politician he lacks skill, they say. And all of this has conspired to create this political storm, “which is nothing more than a hurricane in a glass of water,” in the words of constitutional lawyer Melissa Ayala.

At the midpoint of the electoral campaign that this June will decide who is the new president of Mexico, news spread like wildfire these days: the Judiciary opened an investigation against former minister-president Arturo Zaldívar, a controversial figure. The matter was leaked to the media and soon high-profile names related to the Government and judicial tricks came to light to pressure judges who fell mainly on Zaldívar's team when he presided over the Supreme Court. The issue, in some way, was raining in wet, because many were already suggesting that the retired minister had been a kind of legal arm to carry out some measures of Andrés Manuel López Obrador. There was no surprise at this point, since the president himself in one of his morning conferences hinted that the relationship he maintained with the Judiciary at this time was satisfactory, with dialogue and constant ties with the minister. But the complaint magnified everything.

“What was leaked to the press is very limited and nothing is known about the evidence yet, I don't think a categorical statement can yet be made that Zaldívar incurred irregularities, it is more focused on his collaborators,” says jurist Javier Martín. , from UNAM. But soon Zaldívar came out to say that he was taking revenge on the new president of the Court, Norma Piña, with whom he does not have the best relations. Candidate Sheinbaum defended him and so did President López Obrador. Tito Garza Onofre also believes that what Zaldívar is doing is taking advantage of “a golden moment to be at the center of public opinion, to victimize himself, to throw himself on the ground to throw a tantrum,” because his limited political career did not give him the required results. , even though lately he was a member of the public and some other things, says Garza Onofre, member of the Legal Research Institute of the UNAM. “Every two weeks a scandal breaks out, and he was misplaced in his political role,” he adds.

In any case, the timing of the complaint has not been the best, in the middle of the pre-electoral process they are always weapons for the adversary, maintains Melissa Ayala. His own departure from the Supreme Court was something unprecedented, without having concluded his mandate as dictated by the Constitution. “We are all on edge in these months, I think we should take a step back and analyze. I believe that the Supreme Court has made a mistake by not coming out immediately to explain what was happening and waiting days to issue a statement; The leak was another mistake, for which the media cannot be blamed, of course,” says Ayala. "But if there is something that characterizes Piña, it is caution. He is prudent and prefers to take a while to say something inappropriate, the statement itself is." Garza Onofre also agrees with this: “The Court has been very institutional. Piña has not gotten hooked, his communications are technical,” he says.

But it is difficult not to see ghosts on that side, after the departure of the minister from the Supreme Court and how he immediately subscribed to Moreno's proclamations about the need to reform the Judiciary and criticism of certain privileges that he himself had obtained, such as a lifetime salary and other benefits. Now a possible separation of the Supreme Court and the Judicial Council, which have always been chaired by the same figure, is being proposed by the Morenoist candidacy. The face of these judicial reforms in Sheinbaum's team is Zaldívar and some even suspect that he could be pending to preside over the Council if necessary. All this, without a doubt, can raise blisters among his former colleagues, with whom he does not have the best of relationships. The incessant beating of the President of the Republic in this six-year term against “the caste” and the “Supreme Conservative Power, corrupt and rotten” is crowned with this crisis, when the judicial reform is still to be resolved in the legislative sphere and almost halfway between two six-year terms.

Other cases, such as that of Minister Yasmín Esquivel, denounced for plagiarism in her bachelor's thesis decades ago, present to the Supreme Court the need to design mechanisms to prosecute an active minister, something unprecedented. Now another front is opening: can retired ministers also be prosecuted, as is the case of Zaldívar? There are many fronts that Zaldívar has open in the Court so as not to suspect that the shots against him start from there, but we are still facing an anonymous complaint "that has a very long history." “Many nuances are missing,” says Ayala. “In any case, it is not possible to open a political trial against him because there are still no elements for it. The tools of law are being distorted,” he says. Although perhaps the Supreme Court has had enough of so many attacks, which also came from Minister Lenia Batres, who came to replace Zaldívar with strong attacks on the privileges of her colleagues, in line with the president.

There is an angle that is not completely ruled out either, friendly fire, which in politics is common. “There are voices within Morena that do not view Zaldívar favorably and the party has valuable cadres who could do the task they have in the campaign as well or better than him. Clinging to the defense of the former minister can harm Claudia Sheinbaum's anti-corruption speech,” says Garza Onofre. And Javier Martín adds: “I have no elements to speak of friendly fire, but I can understand that sectors of Morena with ideological congruence view with suspicion a person who is a political weather vane.” Martín remembers that Zaldívar comes from wealthy classes and high legal backgrounds, the same ones from which former President Felipe Calderón and his wife, Margarita Zavala, come. It was Calderón who proposed him to enter the Court. “He was never a lawyer for social causes, but he worked successfully on behalf of large companies; This turn towards Morena is barely six years old and is more pragmatic and strategic,” says Martín. He believes that the anonymous complaint is still something small that the protagonist has made big. “He has taken the opportunity to say that he is on the right side, on Morena's side,” criticizes the jurist.

In any case, he does not believe that this will change the course of the campaign and the result at the polls. What it reveals, in Martín's opinion, is, once again, the power of President Obrador, “who aspires to control the next legislature, before his term ends in September,” he says. Garza Onofre abounds on that flank. “Weeks ago, when the president confessed in La Mañanera that he understood well with Zaldívar and that he told him that judges had to be dictated how to do justice, I understood that he was reminding Zaldívar that if he grew up it was because of him. But seeing the defense that he now makes of the former minister, I no longer understand López Obrador, of course, it is already too late to understand this president,” he says with a telephone smile.

“The issue is very politicized and is not political,” Ayala rejects. “We shouldn't even worry, just process the complaint.” “We have all politicized it, public opinion has also done so. President López Obrador is not even in that matter now, I think, I see him very apart. I interpreted his words in Mañanera as a logical dialogue between powers, nothing more”, and he returns to his initial idea, “this is nothing more than a storm in a glass of water”.