Nine years later 2023/09/28 | Excelsior

For its part, commitment number 91 was: “The Attorney General's Office will, in fact, have absolute autonomy; It will not receive instructions from the President of the Republic and its practices will adhere to the principle of liberal law, according to which, outside the law, nothing and above the law, no one."

That same week, on December 4, 2018, the Commission for Truth and Access to Justice in the Ayotzinapa (Covaj) case was created, with the express mandate of “establishing effective material, legal and human conditions to strengthen the human rights of the relatives of the victims of the Ayotzinapa case.” On January 15, 2019, the Truth Commission was installed, chaired by Alejandro Encinas, Undersecretary of Human Rights, Population and Migration of the Ministry of the Interior.

Months later, on June 26, 2019, the Special Investigation and Litigation Unit for the Ayotzinapa case (UEILCA) was created, headed by Omar Gómez Trejo. In a revealing interview with John Gibler, published by Fifth Element On September 26, Gómez Trejo explained how, due to a State decision, arrest warrants against soldiers were canceled and how the office under his charge and years of investigation into the forced disappearance of 43 students were dismantled. In September 2022, Gómez Trejo resigned from his position and left the country.

The government that has politically exploited the tragedy and crimes of Ayotzinapa to the maximum, the same one that promised to make the truth known and punish those responsible, decided to dismantle the investigation unit. Nine years have passed since the tragedy and crimes of Ayotzinapa. Almost five years have passed since this government and, according to the parents of the victims, the promise of truth and justice has not been fulfilled.

Although trends have slowly decreased, homicides and forced disappearances during this six-year term have already exceeded those of previous six-year terms and are at historic highs. While the government has opted to further militarize public security, the Armed Forces have more power and economic and political influence than before. The victims and their families, unfortunately, remain just as unprotected as before.

There are those who think that this claim is new: “Why didn't you say anything before?” In September 2015 I wrote in this same space that: “For those who say that such or such voices do not have legitimacy to demand something from the government, there are the thousands of voices that, a year later, continue to feel outraged or aggrieved. For those who say that we must look forward, there are the homicides and disappearances after Ayotzinapa. What response does the Mexican State have for them or their families?” (September 26, 2015).

“What do those who said almost a year ago that the PGR's investigation into the Ayotzinapa case was of the first level think today? (…) Can we believe the government? We should? Does the Mexican government or the Attorney General's Office have the incentives to find the historical truth of the facts of a crime? (…) A ruler who does not have sufficient counterweights or control mechanisms has more incentives to abuse power than to limit himself. An official who knows that there will be no consequences or punishments for his ineptitude, bias, or inaction has incentives to be inept, biased, and omissive. “An attorney general’s office that depends on the Executive has more incentives to protect the interests of the federal government than to seek the truth.” (September 12, 2015). Nine years later, I still think the same thing.