LEGAL ACTIVISTS OF COLOR
News, Events, Actions and Commentary on law and social justice. Welcome to the official blog of the United People of Color Caucus (TUPOCC) of the National Lawyers Guild.

Monday, July 17, 2006

Gaza/Lebanon Crises / Mexican Election

in this email - -
 
(1) thoughts for action & Talking Points: Gaza/Lebanon Crises
 
(2)  Alert and request for e-mails regarding the Mexican Election
 
=================================================
 
 If you are interested in participating (& wish to learn more), consider joining the NLG-International Committee, here are some ideas (edited) folks within the NLG are discussing & presently working on...
 
Some groups in our communities are organizing demonstrations and teach-ins.  We should ...participate, and put together a fact sheet.
...Once the fact sheet is produced, we should distribute as widely as possible......[one idea I have is for us to participate in & share a fact sheet at Immigrant Rights Movement  Events...Alejandro]
 
If anyone works with more established groups, - - perhaps we should call for an emergency meeting of that section to issue a statement...
 
 
the NLG has a working group doing work at the UN.  Is there something which can be done at that level?
 
 
We should be drafting op-ed pieces and letters to Congresspeople, - -  Perhaps people can post what they've already written, to make it easier for the rest of us to use these materials... [Marjorie may have an op-ed piece ready by tomorrow...AB]
 
 
- - a national movement organizing teach-ins to be conducted which bring together churches, synagogues, mosques, unions...
 
[if you want to read more there are plenty of interesting articles to read at counterpunch, commmon dreams, ZNET, truthout, AI & HRW, & there are plenty of interviews of interest at Democracy Now!, if you prefer the radio (via internet) check out Pacifica radio, there is an update available on-line of the 6am hour of Wakeup Call today WBAI 99.5 FM,   http://www.wakeupcallradio.org/   --   http://archive.wbai.org/   - -  also check out Democracy Now! (M-F mornings) and Building Bridges (WBAI) on Mondays at 7pm EST  - - Alejandro]
 
 
LISTEN TO PACIFICA
KPFA
listen live · visit online
KPFK
listen live · visit online
KPFT
listen live · visit online
WBAI
listen live · visit online  (Democracy Now! 9am EST  )
WPFW listen live · visit online
 

 
=========================
 
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: 7/13/2006 4:39:17 PM
Subject: [UFPJ] Bennis Talking Points: The Gaza/Lebanon Crises

UFPJ Talking Points

THE GAZA/LEBANON CRISES: ESCALATING OCCUPATION &DANGER OF NEW BORDER FIGHTING

By Phyllis Bennis
Institute for Policy Studies
12 July 2006

** The Israeli attacks constitute collective punishment of the entire Gazan population, and have created a humanitarian crisis of unprecedented proportions in Gaza.

** All these attacks violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which sets out the obligations of occupying powers and specifically prohibits collective punishments, "targeted" assassinations, and destruction of the infrastructure of an occupied territory.

** Israel's assault on Gaza does not constitute a re-occupation, because Israel's occupation of Gaza never ended.

** The expansion of the military escalation to Lebanon represents a potentially serious threat of escalation, especially if there is involvement from Syria.

** The ongoing crisis is political, not just humanitarian. It reflects the failure of Israeli unilateralism, the failure of the "Roadmap," the failure of the U.S.-orchestrated exclusion of the UN, and failure of the international community and the UN to intervene.

** The Gaza escalation demonstrates once again the need for an entirely new, international (not U.S.-sponsored) diplomatic process based on international law and human rights, aimed at ending the occupation and establishing equal rights for all, the only basis for a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the region.

(NOTE: This set of talking points includes quotations from a rather lengthy list of UN humanitarian agencies working on the ground in Gaza; their full reports include much more detail, and I urge people to take a look at them.)

***************************************

The current crisis in Gaza is not a crisis of "re-occupation." The Israeli occupation of Gaza never ended, despite the hype of last year's "disengagement." The New York Times quoted Prime Minister Ehud Olmert saying that Israel will continue to act militarily in Gaza as it sees fit. "We will operate, enter and pull out as needed," he said. The withdrawal of soldiers and settlers from within the territory of the Gaza Strip represented a change in the form of occupation, not an end to occupation. After the "pull-out" Gaza remained besieged and surrounded, and Israel has remained in complete control of all aspects of Gazan life. Israel has continued to control the Gaza economy, withholding $50 million or so Palestinian monthly tax revenues, prohibiting Palestinian workers from entering Israel, and controlling the Israeli and Egyptian border crossings into and out of Gaza for all goods and people. Israel continues to forcibly limit the range of Gaza's fleet of fishermen. It still controls Gaza's airspace and coastal waters, and continues to prohibit construction of a seaport or rebuilding the airport. And Israel continues its air strikes and ground attacks on people and infrastructure throughout Gaza, and continues its nightly barrage of sonic sound-bombs across Gaza's population centers.

As Gideon Levy wrote in the Israeli paper Ha'aretz, "the Palestinians started it" remains the assumption for Israelis, and for most Americans. "'They started' will be the routine response to anyone who tries to argue, for example, that a few hours before the first Qassam fell on the school in Ashkelon, causing no damage, Israel sowed destruction at the Islamic University in Gaza. Israel is causing electricity blackouts, laying sieges, bombing and shelling, assassinating and imprisoning, killing and wounding civilians, including children and babies, in horrifying numbers, but 'they started'."

The new escalation in south Lebanon followed clashes at the Israel-Lebanon border that led to the capture of two Israeli soldiers, apparently inside Israeli territory. If, as it appears (it did not take place in the disputed Sheba'a Farms area) this attack was Hezbollah's initiative in crossing Israel's border, Hezbollah was in violation of international law. Hezbollah claims their attack was designed to help the Palestinians negotiate a prisoner release. But the consequences are already extraordinarily dangerous. In response, Israel has showed its continued willingness to target civilians with completely disproportionate attacks. Israeli warplanes attacked two bridges over the Litani River deep in southern Lebanon, killing two civilians; that was followed by an incursion with tanks, gunboats and planes across the Lebanese border. If the fighting continues, it raises the even more dangerous possibility that Syria could get involved either on the ground in Lebanon or if Israel attacks Syria directly. Such moves could threaten a significant broadening of a potential new war.

The consequences of the Lebanon attacks remain uncertain. But it is in Gaza that the humanitarian crisis is skyrocketing - and there is serious danger that escalating tensions on the Israeli-Lebanese border will divert the world's attention from that crisis. As was evident in sanctions-devastated Iraq in 2003, a new war in the area does not improve the lives of those already suffering extreme humanitarian disaster, but rather exacerbates those problems. These attacks represent a massive collective punishment against the 1.3 million people of Gaza, and thus under international law constitute a war crime, violating Israel's obligations as Occupying Power under the Geneva Conventions. The 12 July air assault on a Gaza house, ostensibly a "targeted assassination" of a Hamas leader, did not kill the official target but did kill two other adults and seven children. The deliberate targeting and destruction of the main electrical generating plant, especially at the height of summer and at a moment in which the absolute siege of Gaza means there are virtually no fuel stocks available for local generators, guarantees humanitarian disaster. The deliberate destruction of the already-eroded water system means that already borderline-saline water is scarcer than ever. Tens of thousands of Gaza City residents live in high-rise apartments of ten floors or higher; without electricity, not only the elevators but even water pumps cannot function. The humanitarian situation is catastrophic.

The crisis is building on the existing humanitarian crisis already underway in Gaza caused by U.S. and Israeli-orchestrated international sanctions against the Palestinians since the January election of a Hamas-led parliament. The goal of undermining the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority's was implemented by punishing the entire Palestinian population, in the misguided hope that economic sanctions would lead to public anger at Hamas, rather than at the occupying powers.

The UN's humanitarian organizations working on the ground in
Gaza have issued statements expressing deep alarm. The agencies "are alarmed by developments on the ground, which have seen innocent civilians, including children, killed, brought increased misery to hundreds of thousands of people, and which will wreak far-reaching harm on Palestinian society. An already alarming situation in Gaza, with poverty rates at nearly eighty per cent and unemployment at nearly forty per cent, is likely to deteriorate rapidly, unless immediate and urgent action is taken."

According to the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "the use of force by Israel during its military operations into the Gaza Strip has resulted in an increasing number of deaths and other casualties amongst the Palestinian civilian population, and significant damage to civilian property and infrastructure." UNRWA, which cares for 980,000 Palestinian refugees, "believes that Gaza is on the brink of a public health disaster." The World Health Organization (WHO) states that "the public health system is facing an unprecedented crisis. WHO estimates that though hospitals and 50 per cent of Primary Health Care Centers have generators, the current stock of fuel will last for a maximum of two weeks. ŠAccording to WHO in the last week, there has been a 160 per cent increase in cases of diarrhea compared with the same period last year. Compounding these problems, WHO estimates that 23 per cent of the essential drug list will be out of stock within one month." The World Food Program (WFP) estimates that "in June 70 % of the Gaza population were already unable to cover their daily food needs without assistance. The escalation of hostilities has made food an increasingly critical issue. Wheat flour mills, food factories and bakeries, reliant on electricity, are being forced to reduce their production due to power shortages; furthermore the loss of capacity to preserve perishable food in the Gaza heat is resulting in high food losses in the home." And UNICEF states "children in Gaza are living in an environment of extraordinary violence, insecurity and fear. Š The ongoing fighting is hurting children psychologically. Caregivers say children are showing signs of distress and exhaustion, including a 15%-20% increase in bedwetting, due to shelling and sonic booms. Š UNICEF stressed that children are always most vulnerable to outbreaks of communicable disease brought on by lack of water and sanitation."

OCHA, the overall humanitarian coordinating agency, calls on Israel to allow UN deliveries of emergency supplies, but recognized that "humanitarian assistance is not enough to prevent suffering. With the bombing of the electric plant, the lives of 1.4 million people, almost half of them children, worsened overnight. The Government of Israel should repair the damage done to the power station. Obligations under international humanitarian law, applying to both parties, include preventing harm to civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure and also refraining from collective measures, intimidation and reprisals. Civilians are disproportionately paying the price of this conflict."

OCHA's mention of international humanitarian law refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 3 (1) (a) prohibits "violence to life and person" and "murder of all kinds." Calling murder "targeted assassination does not make it legal. Article 33 states that "No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited." In Article 36 the "taking of hostages is prohibited." That would include the Israeli arrests of about one-third of the elected Palestinian Legislative Assembly and about one-half of the Palestinian Authority's cabinet ministers, who are being held at least partly to serve as bargaining chips.

But as devastating as the humanitarian crisis is, the even greater catastrophe is political. The assault on Gaza threatens to end any possibility of new Israeli-Palestinian negotiations based on the recent Palestinian unity moves. In fact the drama of the latest Israeli assault largely blocked out most international attention to the very important Hamas-Fatah agreement on the so-called "prisoners' statement." That document provides a strategic approach - now agreed to by virtually all of the Palestinian political class - to the struggle for Palestinian national rights including among other things, a recognition that armed resistance to the Israeli occupation is legitimate but should be limited to the territories occupied in 1967, not inside Israel.

Agreement over the prisoners' statement is particularly significant in relation to the 11 July Washington Post article by Palestinian Prime Minister and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. He wrote that the Gaza crisis is part of a "wider national conflict that can be resolved only by addressing the full dimensions of Palestinian national rights in an integrated manner. This means statehood for the West Bank and Gaza, a capital in Arab East Jerusalem, and resolving the 1948 Palestinian refugee issue fairly, on the basis of international legitimacy and established law. Meaningful negotiations with a non-expansionist, law-abiding Israel can proceed only after this tremendous labor has begun."

That carefully articulated set of Palestinian goals - clearly "moderate" even by U.S. standards - matches closely what Haniyeh describes as Palestinian "priorities." Those include "recognition of the core dispute over the land of historical Palestine and the rights of all its people; resolution of the refugee issue from 1948; reclaiming all lands occupied in 1967; and stopping Israeli attacks, assassinations and military expansion." It is significant that the Hamas leader distinguishes between the need to "recognize" the lost lands and rights of pre-1948 historical Palestine, and the need to "reclaim" those lands occupied in 1967. Recognition of the losses of the Palestinian al-Nakba (catastrophe) of 1948, including the loss of 78% of Palestinian land, the loss of rights in what would become Israel, and the creation of 750,000 refugees still denied their right to return, remains a central Palestinian demand. Many Palestinians have long distinguished between on the one hand their unconditional demand for Israeli recognition of those injustices and its own culpability, and the absolute character of those long-denied rights, and on the other hand the negotiable nature of the reparations to follow. It is especially significant that Hamas' most visible leader has now subscribed to that set of principles.

But despite that very reasonable position, it is clear that Israel intends to impose a unilateral settlement, based on unilaterally determined borders, based on their clear military and strategic power, rather than moving towards negotiations. The political crisis engendered by the Israeli assaults reflects the failure of all existing diplomatic initiatives. Israel's planned unilateral "convergence" plan, of which the so-called "disengagement" from Gaza was the first step, now appears off the agenda. This plan, which Olmert inherited from his predecessor and mentor General Ariel Sharon, called for using the Apartheid Wall as the basis for a unilateral new "border" for Israel, annexing some 20% or so of the West Bank's best land and water resources including three major settlement blocs populated by 80% of Israel's West Bank settlers. At the same time Israel would close the small settlements east of the new borders and remove the 20% of the settlers living there. At least some soldiers would remain in and many more would surround the West Bank, the Jordan Valley would be annexed to Israel, and like post-"disengagement" Gaza, Israel would remain in complete control of the divided, walled-off and truncated Bantustans that would be left of the West Bank.

Olmert faces particular challenges in responding to this crisis because he lacks the military/security credentials of Sharon, and thus must appear militarily aggressive and politically hardline. That appears to be the reason for his publicly claimed refusal to negotiate a prisoner exchange, in which the Palestinians would release the captured Israeli soldier in return for release of some of the 9,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails (particularly the 200+ women and the almost 100 children). Israel has historically negotiated such releases in Lebanon and with the Palestinians, so the sudden "we won't negotiate" posturing is a new development (although Olmert is still using weasel words - it is likely negotiations are indeed underway). The Israeli military command appears somewhat ambivalent about the strategy - among other things they appear to recognize that the intensive air and ground assaults are unlikely to lead to the release of the soldier, and likely to consolidate greater support for Hamas. The soldier's father has also called for negotiations. The humanitarian disaster is now top of the global agenda; while Europe rejected the UN Human Rights Council resolution criticizing the Israeli actions, it issued its own strong criticism the following day. The humanitarian crisis is staggering for Palestinian civilians. But as a result, the longer the crisis plays out, the fewer political OR military options Israel has.

The Bush administration, consumed with global crises in and with Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Somalia as well as rising condemnation for its own crimes in Guantanamo, Iraq and elsewhere, has remained largely silent on the Gaza crisis. The silence has been key; a July 12 Israeli government communiqué said that the "low-key" international response is "allowing Israel military freedom of action and maintaining its ability to receive international backing." But U.S. silence does not indicate lack of involvement. U.S. uncritical support - military, diplomatic, political - for the Israeli occupation remains largely unchallenged, even as more U.S. voices begin to raise at least tentative questions about the brutality of the Israeli assault. Indeed Gaza today is at the center of a horrifying policy cycle of stupidity and violence with the U.S. at its core. The Gaza electrical generating plant destroyed by Israel was originally built by Enron, and later bought out by Morganti, a Connecticut company. Morganti insured the plant for $48 million through the U.S. taxpayer-funded Overseas Private Insurance Corporation, the U.S. government-sponsored "insurance agency of last resort." After Israel used its U.S. taxpayer-funded and U.S.-armed military (F-16 bombers, Apache helicopters, hellfire missiles, etc.) to destroy the U.S.-built plant, Morganti notified the U.S. government that it wants $48 in insurance money. (Some in congress are likely to call for at least taking $48 million out of the annual $3 billion aid to Israel and shifting it to OPICŠ)

The overall causes of the Gaza crisis are political; it is not simply the result of the captured soldier. Similarly, the impact is not just humanitarian, as terrible as humanitarian conditions are. The escalation in Gaza reflects the failure of Israeli unilateralism, the failure of the Quartet-backed "Roadmap," the failure of the U.S.-orchestrated exclusion of the UN, and failure of the international community to end the occupation, and the failure of the UN to intervene and provide international protection in the meantime. While it is clear that Israeli practices, including settlement expansion and especially the Apartheid Wall built across stolen West Bank land, are on the verge of making a two-state solution impossible, it is equally clear that neither Fatah nor Hamas has officially abandoned that as a political goal. But along with Israeli unilateralism, the internationally-supported versions of the "peace process" ostensibly at work have all failed - the U.S.-backed "Roadmap," the diplomatic fiction known as the "Quartet," the exclusion of the United Nations.

In a recent report, the UN's Special Rapporteur for Human Rights John Dugard accepted the argument that "Israel is in violation of major Security Council and General Assembly resolutions dealing with unlawful territorial change and the violation of human rights, has failed to implement the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice and should accordingly be subjected to international sanctions. Instead the Palestinian people have been subjected to possibly the most rigorous form of international sanctions imposed in modern times."

He recognized the failure of the Roadmap, calling for "creative diplomacyŠthat will enable Israel and the Palestinian Authority to resume negotiations for a peaceful settlement and respect for human rights. ŠUnfortunately the United States is unprepared to play the role of peace facilitator. This leaves the EU and the UN as the obvious honest brokers between Israelis and Palestinians. Whether either of these bodies can play this role while remaining part of the Quartet is questionable. The image of both the EU and the UN has suffered substantially among Palestinians as a result of the Quartet's apparent support for economic isolation, under the direction of the United States. ŠHowever, they remain the bodies most likely to achieve peace and promote human rights in the region. In these circumstances both bodies should seriously consider whether it is in the best interests of peace and human rights in the region for them to seek to find a peaceful solution through the medium of the Quartet."

Similarly, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan raised the possibility of a new diplomatic campaign outside the failed Quartet, saying "the UN and the other members of the international community are, for the moment, working through the Quartet, but it is not excluded that, down the line, maybe other broader initiatives may be necessary." Such a new initiative might take the form of a new UN-sponsored international peace conference, based on the political call of the 2002 Beirut Arab Summit Declaration, only at a global level instead of regional. Unlike the limited mandate of the so-called "roadmap" (which did not stop Israeli's continued construction of the land-grabbing Apartheid Wall and which Israel has not implemented anyway) such a conference should be based on an unequivocal end to Israeli occupation, a just solution for Palestinian refugees based on the international law-based right of return and UN resolution 194, and equal rights for all. Such a result would be the only basis for a just and lasting peace throughout the region.
____________________________
Phyllis Bennis is a Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington and the Transnational Institute in Amsterdam. Her latest book is CHALLENGING EMPIRE: HOW PEOPLE, GOVERNMENTS AND THE UN DEFY U.S. POWER.
 
========================================================================================
 
Alert and request for e-mails regarding the Mexican Election
 
Letter Requesting recount

Many organizations in Mexico have called for a vote by vote recount.  Tom Loudon of the Alliance for Responsible Trade has sent out an alert to US organizations, explaining: "Our colleagues in the Mexican Action Network on Free Trade have suggested a "cyberaction" through which we can show solidarity with efforts to win a recount of the Presidential vote. They suggest we send messages to the Electoral Tribunal (the body that actually declares a winner distinct from the Federal Electoral Institute IFE that conducted the voting) urging a recount in an open transparent manner."   He has composed a draft letter, adopted from the message in Spanish sent by RMALC and designed for Mexican citizens which I have modified somewhat.  Please send it or draft your own!

Draft Message:

Lic. José Jacinto Díaz Careaga Comunicación Social <csocial@trife.org.mx>

As a person deeply concerned that elections in the U.S. and elsewhere are truly democratic, I am writing to express my concern that the outcome of Mexico's Presidential election be certified in a transparent manner.  Therefore I urge you to order the District Councils of the federal election institute to hold a recount of all votes and all ballot boxes.  The only way to be certainty that the election is fair and democratic is to conduct a recount in the presence of representatives of all the parties and independent citizen monitors.  There is international precedent for such measures, as a vote by vote recount was conducted in Costa Rica and Italy to ensure credibility and legitimacy.


From:  Mexican Action Network Against Free Trade (RMALC)
To:  all partner and solidarity organizations

Mexico's Election Day is not over and there is still is no winner in the Presidential race.

There is an ongoing effort to create the illusion that the election is over and that Calderon is the winner.  Part of the strategy being used to promote this illusion is to have foreign leaders can to congratulate him on his 'victory'.

According to electoral law, also known as the Federal Code of Electoral Procedures and Institutions, the presidential election process is over when, in compliance with Article 174(6), "The concluding stage of electoral validation happens when the Superior Court of the Electoral Tribunal, renders a verdict based on the final count and a declaration of validity of the election and the President elect" (1). This decision has not yet been issued. The declarations of the Councilor President of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) are being manipulated. His role is only to provide the result of his counting of the votes, not to declare the winner.  As previously stated, this is the role of the Tribunal which, declares the winner after a revision and resolution of all disputes. 

Therefore, it is not only imprecise, but also openly illegitimate for a presidential candidate or institution other than the Electoral Court, and even worse, for the spokesperson of a foreign government, to congratulate a candidate or imply that a particular candidate has won.

As is well known, the result of the initial count between the two leading candidates was extremely close, and questioning of these results has been presented to the extent allowed by law. Also, diverse group of social organizations have presented the demand for unrestricted compliance to the electoral process. We, therefore, endorse a vote-by-vote and box-by-box recount with the wide participation of civil society.

For these legal, ethical, and social reasons, we ask for your extensive solidarity regarding the carrying out of democratic electoral processes in Mexico.  As Mexican civil society, we ask that you assist with  spreading this information and pressuring your government to abstain from making any political statements and to respect the Mexican electoral process and law.

With respect and solidarity,

Executive Committee of the Mexican Action Network against Free Trade

From ANAD:
To Public Opinion in Mexico and in all of the countries of the world:
The presidential election in México is not yet over, nor is the IFE the authority which determines the final results, and least of all is the president elect Calderón.

On the 6th of July, the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) announced that Felipe Calderón won the vote count performed by the IFE by 0.58%. However, it failed to clarify that such a result is provisional, not definitive.  This is because the right to give the definitive result in the presidential election belongs exclusively, and in a manner that excludes all others, to the Superior Court of the Federal Electoral Tribunal.

Article 99 of the Constitution provides that: "The challenges which are presented regarding the election of the President of the Republic shall be finally resolved by the Superior Court."  And only this (entity): "Will make the final count in the election of the President of the Republic, once the challenges which may have been filed are resolved, and will proceed to formulate the declaration of validity of the election and the declaration of validity of the President elect, with respect to the candidate who shall have obtained the greater number of votes."

The Supreme Law of Mexico specifies that the Superior Court of the Federal Electoral Tribunal is the only body which can give the definitive result of the presidential election, after attending to the challenges which are presented on the 9th and 10th of July, and making the final and definitive count of the votes. The same constitution determines that until the resolution of the Superior Court issues, the candidates are considered to be contenders. 

Nobody may proclaim his victory, and even less so when the difference, according to the IFE, is only 0.58% of a total of 100%. Therefor, neither Calderón has won the election, nor may he proclaim himself president elect of México, because the challenges can change the result given by the IFE.

Because of this, we demand of the PAN, of Calderón, of the business leaders and of those who govern México and the world: abstain from recognizing Calderón explicitely or implicitely as the winner of the election or as president elect out of respect for the Constitution of México and for the free will and sovereignty of the people of Mexico.

Sincerely, the National Association of Democratic Lawyers (ANAD) 


From the UNT:
National Union of Workers
 
MANIFESTO TO THE NATION

 
TOTAL RESPECT FOR CITIZEN'S VOTES AND A SOLUTION FOR TO LABOR AND SOCIAL CONFLICTS
 
By turning out en masse to vote on July 2nd, Mexican citizens confirmed their commitment to democracy and their desire that the problems of our country should be resolved by peaceful means in an environment of plurality and tolerance.
 
We are certain that irrespective of who assumes the Presidency of the Republic, the underlying problems of the country will continue to worsen and the failure to resolve them could generate serious conflicts.
 
In order to begin, we demand that the present government reach an agreement with regard to the current conflicts which today raise the question of respect for union autonomy: the mineworkers, the townspeople of San Salvador Atenco, the workers at the colegio de bachilleres and the teachers of Oaxaca.
 
This would be the first signal of détente, the value of which will increase if we take into account that in the background, at least in the mineworkers' conflict, there is the issue of the relationship that should exist between social organizations and the government.
 
Consequently, for the UNT, an inviolable principle is respect for the popular will expressed in the ballot boxes, and therefore we demand of the electoral authorities and of the federal government a posture which is impartial and in accordance with the law which guarantees that all of the votes cast by the electors shall be respected and that complaints and observations of the contending parties shall be dealt with in a timely fashion
 
It is necessary to refocus the electoral process and leave it free of any doubts, conducting it under conditions transparency, certainty and legitimacy. However, there is a lack of political will that there should be certainty that the votes cast and those counted coincide. This is an opportunity for the electoral bodies to confirm their institutional character and credibility and provide vote counts which are unobjectionable to the citizens.
 
Once the electoral process is concluded, the new government will be based only upon 35% of those showing an electoral preference and with thirty million Mexicans who did not go to vote. Democratic governability cannot be constructed upon such a narrow base.
 
In order to promote the easing of political tension and stability, it is necessary for society to take the political initiative to avoid a totalitarian outcome, and to initiate a process of consensus-building with all of the political and social forces in order to tackle a social agenda for the democratic transformation of the country.  
 
In order to promote the easing of political tension and strengthen stability, it is necessary for society to take the political initiative  in order to avoid a totalitarian outcome to the current political crisis.
 
For us there is no doubt about the urgency in constructing a different relationship between the government and society, starting with a satisfactory response to the social demands and the recognition of the autonomy, the independence and the plurality of union, farm worker and community organizations and strict application of the law. 
 
Autonomy, independence, transparency, democracy and plurality are, on the other hand, the foundation for strengthening the unity we have built in recent years and which today is expressed in groupings such as the UNT, through which we promote actions and proposals in order to solve the problems of the Nation.
 
Because of this, another task of organizations such as the UNT and other civil and community organizations is to confront this situation by promoting dialogue among all of the political and social actors in order to achieve the democratization of the nation and the world of work through social and democratic reform of the state and through a new accord or social contract which is inclusive and democratic. 
 
Only in this manner will it be possible to overcome the risks that surround the current electoral process and establish the basis for a nation which is sustainable and supported by values such as democracy, justice and equity. 
 
 
 
 
 
"For the Self-Sufficiency of the Working Class"

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Nice! Where you get this guestbook? I want the same script.. Awesome content. thankyou.
»

Archive