mayan train
Regarding the suspensions that have been granted to Section 5 of the Mayan Train, Zaldívar said that “the judges are dictating them according to law”: “I have no intervention in these matters.”
“They are doing their job as usual. The decisions of the judges are issued by them, with their autonomy and independence. As far as I know, because I do not know the issues, because it is not my responsibility to know them, the suspensions have been given in environmental terms, nothing that has to do with national security.
Rosario Oaks
On another issue, the judge rejected that the Public Defender’s Office is defending the former Secretary of Social Development, Rosario Robles (currently imprisoned in the Santa Martha Acatitla prison, accused of organized crime and money laundering), because “she has a private defense .
“I understand that one of the 180 issues that are focused on resolving justified preventive detention is one of the amparos for Mrs. Rosario Robles. So, this matter of justified preventive detention will surely affect your situation, regardless, I don’t know, if you have other means of defense that are close to being resolved, ”she commented.
Wallace case
Regarding the accusations of Isabel Miranda de Wallace against him, linked to the case of his son, Alberto Wallace, Arturo Zaldívar clarified that he has already filed a complaint for these facts: “I am confident that the FGR will do its job and determine what corresponds ”.
He said that he will not comment further on this subject, because what he is looking for – he accused – is publicity and victimization.
“I repeat, we all know who. I can only tell you one thing: if today he is capable of fabricating evidence and denouncing the President of the Court, what would he not have done against defenseless people when he had all the power protected by (Vicente) Fox, (Felipe) Calderón and (Genaro) Garcia Luna?
Preventive prison
Minister Arturo Zaldívar announced that the Court will soon resolve two issues related to preventive detention.
“It will be the first time that there will be clear rules on this issue and it will come to the Court to be adjusted, confirmed or revoked.
“(…) Here what is going to be seen in plenary is an action of unconstitutionality, I understand that the issue of the First Chamber, if it should be some amparo trial,” he added.
