After the Ministry of Public Administration (SFP) determined that there is no evidence that President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and his son have incurred a conflict of interest with businessman Daniel Chávez Morán, president of Grupo Vidanta, and honorary advisor of the Mayan Train, experts on the subject considered that the SFP missed an opportunity to strengthen its image in the fight against corruption.
Last Friday, the SFP announced that due to lack of elements, the General Directorate of Complaints and Investigations of the SFP concluded the investigation initiated last February related to a complaint for possible conflict of interest, bribery and bribery, in the that the president’s son, José Ramón López Beltrán, and the companies KEI Partners and Baker Hughes were mentioned.
“Based on the information obtained and the applicable legal framework, the investigation determined that no competent and conclusive evidence was found to prove the alleged commission of facts, acts or omissions that could lead to an administrative fault attributable to the public servant (the president). and to individuals”, he reported last Friday.
Likewise, he ruled out irregularities in the permits and concessions that Grupo Vidanta has received from the federal government.
“Based on the evidence, the General Directorate of Complaints and Investigations of the SFP issued the Conclusion Agreement due to lack of elements,” he concluded.
The investigation by the SFP derived from a complaint filed by Senator Xóchitl Gálvez (PAN), after learning that López Beltrán was hired in the United States by a company in which two sons of Chávez Morán, a businessman appointed by the federal government as shareholders, are shareholders. honorary supervisor of the Mayan Train.
incomplete results
Fernanda Avendaño, IMCO’s anti-corruption coordinator, indicated that society cannot remain calm with the response given by the SFP, since the results of the investigation were reported in an ambiguous and incomplete manner, which calls into question the impartiality of the agency.
The expert commented that if there is an exhaustive investigation, which has a conclusion, the data must be thoroughly known and thus be able to answer the questions that have been raised for some months about the relations of the federal Executive and their relatives or friends.
“There were many opportunities to answer questions that arose over the months and strengthen (the SFP) its powers and at the same time the fight against corruption.
“And this leaves us with the same question and the same taste in the mouth that no, that there is still a long way to go and that modifying certain laws or powers of the SFP will not be enough if the implementation is not adequate,” he said.
low expectations
Eduardo Bohórquez, director of Transparencia Mexicana, indicated that since it was the president himself who reported the employment relationship between his son and a company linked to the Vidanta group in one of his morning conferences, it was unlikely that the SFP would determine any conflict of interest. interest.
“Due to the nature of the employment relationship described between the company and the president’s son, it was unlikely that administrative fault could be proven,” he said.
It is in this sense that the expert called to wait for the resolutions of other instances in the criminal field.
“Therefore, we will have to wait for the results of the investigations, which, as far as is known, are also conducted by the Attorney General’s Office, as part of the complaints filed on this same issue,” he added.
However, he recognized that regardless of the investigations in administrative or criminal matters, the relationship of the members of the presidential family with supplier companies and concessionaires of the Mexican State, hurts the symbolic heart of the so-called republican austerity.