**Constitutional Reform Sparks Controversy Over Alleged Ghost Votes**
On the night of October 31, 2024, President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo announced the publication of a constitutional reform decree in the Official Journal of the Federation. This amendment, pushed forward by the political party Morena, modifies Article 107 and adds a fifth paragraph to Article 105 of the Constitution. Dubbed “constitutional supremacy,” the reform aims to prevent challenges to constitutional amendments via any legal route, taking effect on November 1 of the same year.
Controversy arose shortly after, as Pedro Haces Barba, a federal deputy for Morena and general secretary for the Confederation of Autonomous Workers and Employees of Mexico (CATEM), admitted that he was absent during the session when the reform was approved. Despite this, his vote mysteriously appeared on the voting board at the Plenary Hall of San Lázaro.
Challenging accusations from the National Action Party (PAN), Haces Barba denied being present at the session and refuted claims that he was in New York attending the World Series baseball game instead. He underlined his commitment to labor duties across the country and dismissed the situation with irony, joking about potential “ghosts” influencing the vote board.
Further fueling the dispute, Ricardo Monreal Ávila, the coordinator for Morena’s parliamentary group, confirmed Haces Barba’s absence on the day in question, suggesting that parliamentary services should clarify the matter. This mystery vote led to strong reactions from opposition parties, including a public denouncement by Rafael Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, president of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), who criticized the proceedings and announced plans for legal action against the perceived malpractice.
In related developments, José Gerardo Rodolfo Fernández Noroña, president of the Senate’s Directing Board, instructed the Senate’s legal department to request dismissals of any legal challenges to the newly enacted constitutional reforms, highlighting the government’s intent to preserve the supremacy and inviolability of the Constitution.
—
**Additional Context: Related Political Tensions and Responses**
Besides the internal controversies surrounding the alleged vote mishap, the constitutional reform has sparked broader political dissent. Critics argue that the move consolidates power and potentially undermines democratic processes. Legal experts and political analysts debate the implications of such reforms on the checks and balances within the governmental structure.
In parallel developments, various civic organizations have stated their intent to scrutinize and potentially contest the reform in domestic and international forums, arguing for the preservation of mechanisms that allow constitutional amendments to be challenged legally.
The situation continues to evolve as political and public opinions are divided, highlighting contrasting priorities between the government’s intent to streamline legal processes and opposition concerns over democratic oversights and accountability.
Stay tuned to TJ Gringo for ongoing updates and insights into this developing story.