### The Call to Abolish INAI: A Step Back in Transparency
The contentious stance of President López Obrador is in the spotlight yet again as he attempts to dismantle one of Mexico’s greatest democratic achievements: the National Institute for Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (INAI). When former President Vicente Fox spearheaded the movement to create an entity for public transparency, he likely never anticipated that this initiative would become a tool to unearth significant controversies, the first being the exorbitant expenditures within the Presidential residence of Los Pinos.
In the early 2000s, the then Federal Institute for Access to Information (IFAI) played a crucial role in exposing the irresponsible management of public funds. This marked one of the earliest instances where an official transparency organization held the government accountable, laying the groundwork for a legally mandated system ensuring public access to governmental information.
Since its inception, both IFAI and its successor, INAI, have proven to be invaluable in revealing instances of corruption across all government administrations. Even during Enrique Peña Nieto’s presidency, characterized by frequent corruption allegations, these institutions managed to negotiate with civil organizations to enhance the legal framework governing transparency.
With the transformation from IFAI to INAI, the scope for public scrutiny only broadened. Peña Nieto himself faced significant fallout from such transparency efforts, particularly with the scandal surrounding his “White House,” which substantially damaged his standing.
Interestingly, López Obrador himself benefitted from the revelations brought forth by journalistic efforts, made possible in part by information desclassified by INAI. Nonetheless, his current push to abolish INAI jeopardizes three decades of citizen-led achievements in transparency and governmental accountability.
No compelling argument supports the removal of INAI, despite occasional controversies arising from its usage of public funds. The institution remains one of the few effective mechanisms available for assessing governmental performance.
López Obrador’s initiative not only defies the progress made in democratizing information but also threatens a fundamental human right—access to information. This is particularly concerning given that he has no plans to replace INAI with a more effective institution, essentially erasing years of advancements in transparency with a single decision.
Local transparency bodies like ITAIPBC may face challenges from political influences, but even an imperfect system is preferable to none. As one of the most drastic actions of López Obrador’s presidency, the eradication of INAI would undermine critical oversight and transparency, cornerstones of democratic governance.
### Additional Developments in Mexican Transparency
**Military Sector Development Crucial for Investment:**
In related developments, analysts highlight the necessity for Mexico to develop its military sector to attract investment. Current strategies fall short, and experts argue that enhanced military capabilities could foster a more stable environment conducive to economic growth.
**Police Corruption in Port Cities:**
New evidence suggests collusion between port city police forces and criminal organizations. This revelation by the Attorney General’s Office underscores the urgent need for transparency and accountability in local law enforcement.
**Protests in Tijuana’s Judicial System:**
Over 800 participants recently marched in Tijuana to protest issues within the judiciary. The demonstration reflects the community’s demand for transparency and justice, further validating the importance of institutions like INAI.
## Conclusion
Efforts to dismantle INAI represent a significant step backward in the fight for transparency and accountability in Mexico. Even with ongoing issues in local transparency bodies, the existence of such institutions is critical. As the nation grapples with corruption and a demanding public increasingly aware of its rights, preserving and improving these mechanisms should be a top priority.