Jorge Triana beat up Q4 officials for statements by Pablo Gómez

The PAN deputy assured that “the government wants to sanction citizens who did not vote in the fraudulent consultation”, after the FIU head said that voting in the Mandate Revocation was mandatory

Guardar
CIUDAD DE MÉXICO, 07MARZO2019.- Eduardo Santillán, presidente de la Comisión de Administración y Procuración de Justicia, y Mauricio Tabe, diputado panista, durante la sesión del congreso de la Ciudad de México, donde se aprobó por 63 votos la creación de la Guardia Nacional.
FOTO: GALO CAÑAS /CUARTOSCURO.COM
CIUDAD DE MÉXICO, 07MARZO2019.- Eduardo Santillán, presidente de la Comisión de Administración y Procuración de Justicia, y Mauricio Tabe, diputado panista, durante la sesión del congreso de la Ciudad de México, donde se aprobó por 63 votos la creación de la Guardia Nacional. FOTO: GALO CAÑAS /CUARTOSCURO.COM

The deputy of the National Action Party (PAN), Jorge Triana, lashed out at various officials of the self-described Fourth Transformation (Q4), which is led by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), due to statements by Pablo Gómez about the consultation on the Revocation of Mandate.

Through his Twitter account, the blue and white legislator assured that “the government wants to punish citizens who did not vote in the fraudulent consultation.”

“The government wants to sanction citizens who did not vote in the fraudulent revocation consultation of the president and at the same time wants atrocities such as those of Gertz, Bartlett, Scherer, Ana Guevera, Ovalle, Carlos Lomelí, Delfina, López-Gatell to go unpunished,” the panist legislator wrote on social media.

Infobae

Although he did not justify the reasons why he pointed out certain public officials, Jorque Triana's words were given after, in recent days, the head of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) said that citizen participation in the Mandate Revocation was mandatory and if he had not attended the polls on 10 April would have consequences.

Pablo Gómez cited article 35 of the Mexican Constitution, which states that all citizens have the obligation to vote in elections, popular consultations and revocation processes, and specified “the sanction for not doing so” in the 38th.

However, Gómez had a little confusion regarding the article of the Constitution that establishes compulsory nature, and shortly thereafter made the point that article 35 speaks of the right to vote, while article 38 mentions sanctions for not voting.

Infobae

However, the head of FIU repromulgated that the National Electoral Institute (INE) did not inform Mexicans that voting in the Mandate Revocation was mandatory. This is after only 16.5 million Mexicans with voter's credentials went to the polling stations while nearly 76 million people chose not to attend.

Given this, the INE assured, on April 14, that the two trusts it has are protected by law, and accompanied its message with a rebuttal to Pablo Gómez, without explicitly mentioning it, stating: “Whoever says that the INE could put more boxes with that money, lies.”

The electoral body explained, in a statement, that the trusts it has, both the Fund to Meet Labor Liabilities and the Fund for the Fulfillment of the Real Estate Infrastructure Program, cannot be used for a purpose other than the one they were created.

Infobae

This is due to the fact that the Federal Law on Budget and Financial Responsibility establishes in article 11 that “the unit responsible for the agency or entity from whose budget the resources have been allocated, or which coordinates their operation, shall be responsible for their application for the purposes for which the trust”.

“Altogether, the trusts have a balance of 1,353.09 million pesos, of which only 626.15 million pesos are available, but cannot be used for purposes other than those specified,” he added.

For his part, Pablo Gómez replied: “What the INE officially responds to me about its two trusts is one of many demonstrations of the illegal nature of both. The INE is not a social security institution nor is it a real estate fund. It could not set aside resources for purposes other than its function.”

KEEP READING:

Guardar