Guadalupe Taddei INE controversy, Digi Mart USA News: In many cases, looking outward helps people look at themselves. Elections in the United States, where Democrats regained control of Congress, recall a basic function of democracy: allowing citizens to punish the government and impose limits on it.
The result does not by itself solve American problems, but it shows that power can meet resistance at the ballot box.
From Mexico, the author writes, one ends up wondering about the conditions under which Mexicans will face the next election. Over time, the debate continues about what democracy is and how much it can withstand.
It can coexist with violence, corruption and populism. That coexistence, however, is far from a good sign.
It points to a weakened rule of law, a wearing down of public ethics and a political cynicism that holds that everyone is corrupt, everyone does the same, and therefore no one has moral authority to make complaints.
Corruption is a cancer that erodes institutions. The case of Guadalupe Taddei has opened a crisis at the INE over alleged irregularities in its contracting, but also over the political use of the scandal.
Her resignation left open investigations, a provisional presidency and a structure under review. The Institute reported 30 departures through resignation.
Each person’s responsibility must be proven, although the damage to public trust has already been done.
According to the column, Morena accuses the opposition of discrediting the referee to justify a future defeat through fraud claims. The opposition accuses the ruling party of having captured the Institute to prepare that fraud.
No version replaces evidence, but there is a difference: the justice apparatus is politically aligned with the ruling party. The prosecutor’s office that must investigate is headed by a former federal government official.
Corruption and its denunciation have marked much of Mexico’s recent politics. The Fourth Transformation came to power driven by public exhaustion with PRI-era corruption and a promise to end it.
Today, accusations against Mexican politicians also serve the United States as an instrument of pressure. The Taddei case compromises the body responsible for organizing Mexico’s elections.
The column argues that denouncing corruption in Mexico helps win elections, remove officials and justify control of institutions, but does not eradicate it. The problem worsens when the fight against corruption depends on political convenience.
Adversaries are investigated, allies are defended and responsibility is sought in previous administrations. President Sheinbaum has insisted that the supplier network predates Taddei.
If so, it should be investigated, but its age does not explain why it kept operating nor absolve those who were obliged to supervise it.
Rather than examining the underlying problem within the state, the column says, authorities prefer to regulate private activity and its relationship with government without comprehensively examining how public servants interact with those private firms. Public procurement and contracting processes become more complicated and, when discretion persists, the price of illegal commissions rises.
Requirements accumulate while room for corruption grows.
The Superior Audit Office (ASF) has announced a study of electoral acquisitions between 2000 and 2025. The law allows earlier fiscal years to be investigated under specific assumptions, but the core question is why annual reviews of the Public Account failed to detect and correct what is now under investigation.
What was observed, and what follow-up was carried out? Revisiting 25 years also requires reviewing those who were supposed to audit.
At the INE, the column notes, debate has focused on who knew whom, rather than on what the 2024 reform allowed: that its presidency could directly appoint directors and heads of technical units, sidelining the General Council. Concentrating decisions and removing checks makes abuse easier.
It is the same logic as a Congress that approves without resistance whatever the Executive sends.
Reducing the case to personal relationships, the author argues, avoids examining an institutional design that permits power to be exercised without accountability. It is not known what will result from the 2027 election, but the signals are worrying.
A democracy needs defeat to be possible and results to be credible. Today, even before discussing whether the vote will be respected, it is already under suspicion, down to how the crayons used to mark it were purchased.
