Mexico Justice System Fuels Doubt About Assassination

Soon after ruling party presidential candidate Luis Donaldo Colosio was assassinated in Tijuana last month, the chief suspect was jailed, along with four alleged co-conspirators. At first glance, authorities here appeared to be off on a rapid execution of justice.

But far from finding reassurance in the swift investigation of this country’s most shocking political murder in more than half a century, Mexicans are growing increasingly suspicious and uneasy.

Part of the problem, experts say, is inherent in Mexico’s criminal justice system. It emphasizes the largely private exchange of file folders of evidence and transcripts rather than allowing for lawyers’ arguments and the cross-examination of witnesses in public trials.

Furthermore, few Mexicans understand the workings of their bureaucratic system, which has its roots in this nation’s time under Spanish conquest and colonization and has been tainted with widespread accusations of corruption.

And the special twists of the Colosio investigation--which critics say has become politicized and is far too secretive--have shown Mexico’s criminal justice system in the least favorable light, analysts say.

“The judge in this case has a historic opportunity to show what a Mexican tribunal is capable of doing,” said one noted defense lawyer. But “that opportunity has been diminished by a series of lamentable errors.”

Many legal sources interviewed declined to be identified because they may handle matters in the future before key figures now handling the Colosio case: Alejandro Sosa, the judge who is presiding over the suspects’ trials, and Miguel Montes, the Supreme Court justice who has been appointed the special prosecutor.

The legal experts noted that in the Mexican system--in sharp contrast to its U.S. counterpart--judges have considerable discretion and power. And while lawyers here do not challenge jurists publicly, privately they are joining human rights activists and other Mexicans in criticizing aspects of the assassination investigation.

Critics say the special prosecutor has been far too inaccessible; he has provided his information, thus far, via videotaped messages sent to television networks and via press releases distributed by the president’s press office to print media.

Families of those arrested also complain that suspects are being kidnaped and are disappearing from Tijuana only to appear days later in custody in Mexico City. Meantime, this nation has been swept with wild rumors in which witnesses have been confused with suspects.

But legal sources here expressed their gravest doubts about fairness issues in this case when considering restrictions placed on public access to the suspects’ trials. For security reasons, authorities have announced that the trials will be conducted in a fortress-like prison near the capital. Journalists have been allowed into the courtroom and have reported on the proceedings there in detail.

Lawyers argue, however, that that is insufficient. “The trial should be public because that is what the law demands,” said one lawyer.

Even if it is in a more open site, analysts here note, a Mexican court--even when considering a case as astonishing as the Colosio assassination--offers far less drama than does its American or British counterpart because of its paper-heavy procedures.

A Mexican trial begins when the prosecutor presents the judge with evidence that a crime has been committed and names the suspect. The judge considers the evidence and decides whether a trial is merited; if so, he decides whether the accused should be released on bail or detained.

As in the United States, the suspect is innocent until proven guilty. But beyond that rudimentary concept, the U.S. and Mexican systems have almost nothing in common.

In Mexico, for example, the victim’s family gets a voice in a criminal trial and enjoys a status equal to that of the prosecutor, the defense lawyer or the accused.

If a trial is merited, the Mexican judge independently decides what evidence presented by the prosecutor is pertinent to the case and discards the rest. Each side then presents “proofs,” usually testimony. This phase of the trial can take up to a year.

The judge in Mexico decides when sufficient proof has been presented and closes the case, telling prosecutors to present written conclusions. It is only when these conclusions are presented that a suspect is formally charged with the crime.

The defense then rebuts the prosecution--also in writing. The judge then decides the suspect’s guilt or innocence and hands down a sentence.

Either side can present appeals at the end of any phase of the trial.

This “is a system that has the few virtues and all of the defects of the archaic colonial system,” said one lawyer.

The criminal justice system is one of Mexico’s major problems, Ernesto Zedillo, Colosio’s successor, conceded in his first television interview as the new ruling party presidential candidate.

“We must recognize the vices, failures and deficiencies evident in our country’s justice system,” he said, calling for a thorough revision of it, from the police to the courts.

But when it comes to handling the Colosio case, the government and the ruling party have done anything but engage in more open, reformist conduct, critics say.

They note, for example, that Montes is a loyal member of the ruling party who was head of the Mexican Congress when it certified the controversial 1988 presidential election. Further, though now responsible for a huge criminal case, he lacks a significant background in such matters. He was district attorney of Mexico City for only about 1 1/2 years.

And as for his reputation as a justice, one lawyer quipped, “Let’s just say he’s not Earl Warren,” referring to the highly respected chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court who conducted the much-criticized, but highly public investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Besides complaining about the furtiveness of the special prosecutor and his failure to provide detailed information, relatives of the accused have complained bitterly about the secretive methods of his federal investigators. For example, they accuse the investigators of holding the suspects incommunicado for days.

The human rights ombudsman in Baja California has filed a formal complaint against the federal government on behalf of the family of Vicente Mayoral Valenzuela, a former state police commander accused of aiding the assassin, and his son Rodolfo, both members of the security detail in Tijuana.

“As far as we are concerned, it was a kidnaping by the government,” said Gerardo Becerra, Mayoral’s son-in law, in an interview Monday. “We heard about their arrests through the press. The authorities haven’t even told us where they are.”

Darling reported from Mexico City and Rotella from Tijuana.