Breathe
By Soledad Durazo
Santiago Nieto Castillo, until last Thursday Attorney General of the State of Hidalgo, announced his resignation in order to seek a seat in the Senate of the Republic. However, despite his aspiration, the road could be full of constitutional obstacles that -ifobserved- would prevent him from running for such position.
Why? It turns out that his birth certificate - in possession of this columnist - reveals that he was born in Mexico City, although his registration was made in the government offices of San Juan del Río, Querétaro. That is to say, the also former head of the Financial Intelligence Unit came into this world in the Mexican capital but was then taken by his parents to register in that state as having been born, effectively in Mexico City.
Let us recall that Article 58 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States clearly establishes the requirements to be a senator, equating most of them to those required to be a deputy, with the sole exception of age. One of these requirements, crucial in the case of Nieto, is the need to be a native by birth of the federative entity in which the election is held or, alternatively, to be an inhabitant thereof with an effective residence of more than 6 months prior to the date of the election, as stipulated in Article 55, Section III of the same Constitution.
A detailed analysis of the situation reveals that Nieto does not meet any of these requirements. The first requirement that he does not meet is explained by his birth, but he would still have a second option: that of residency, but this option is not covered either.
According to the concept of effective residence established in a jurisprudence of the Superior Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal of the Judiciary of the Federation (Thesis LXIII/2001) implies both a material and physical component as well as an objective one, related to the performance of a productive and honorable activity in the place of residence.
Nieto, however, does not satisfy the requirement of effective residence in Querétaro since until January 8, 2024 he served as the head of the Attorney General's Office of the State of Hidalgo. This exercise of functions in another state during the six months prior to the election in Queretaro clearly contradicts the constitutional requirement of effectively residing in the entity of election during that period, even though he may argue that he went to Queretaro on weekends. I sought Nieto's version on this issue but had no response by the time this edition went to press.
The only exception contemplated in the Constitution with respect to this requirement is the holding of a popularly elected public office. However, the position held by Nieto is not a popularly elected position, but an appointed position (attorney general), which complicates his position in relation to the aforementioned exception.
This evidence raises crucial questions about Nieto's eligibility for the Senate. How can a candidate who does not meet the constitutional requirements aspire to represent a state in the Senate of the Republic? Is it ethical for someone to seek an office for which he or she does not qualify according to the country's magna carta?
We leave these questions in the air, waiting for the doubts about Santiago Nieto's candidacy to be clarified. The situation raises not only legal, but also ethical questions about transparency and honesty in political participation. Society deserves clear answers before placing its trust in a candidate who, so far, seems to face constitutional barriers to reach the position to which he aspires.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of the company. Opinion 51.
More than 150 opinions from 100 columnists await you for less than one book per month.
Comments ()