Mexico's INE Clarifies No Sanctions Yet on PAN Over 'Narco-Party' Accusations

Mexico's National Electoral Institute (INE) has issued a clarification regarding a complaint filed by the ruling Morena party against the opposition National Action Party (PAN) and PAN official Miguel Alfredo Hernández Peñaflor. The complaint stems from Peñaflor's public statements labeling Morena as a "narco-party."

The INE emphasized that no determination of responsibility has been made, and consequently, no sanctions have been imposed on the PAN or Peñaflor. Furthermore, the institute has not ordered the removal of the publications in question. The INE explained that a request for information sent to Peñaflor is a preliminary step, not an order to retract statements or an indication of the INE's agreement with the allegations. This process is designed to gather necessary elements to decide whether the complaint should proceed or be dismissed, ensuring the accused are aware of the charges and can present their defense.

Morena's complaint, registered on July 23, alleges the repeated and systematic dissemination of slanderous electoral propaganda across social media platforms by Hernández Peñaflor. The complaint is currently under review by the Technical Unit of Electoral Litigation (UTCE). The UTCE has reserved its decision on the complaint's admission and any potential precautionary measures until the preliminary investigation is complete. As part of this investigation, the INE has ordered the certification of the disputed publications and requested information from various parties, including the PAN and Peñaflor himself, to ascertain account ownership, authorship, and dissemination details.

Peñaflor responded to the INE's information request on August 23. Based on the information received, the electoral authority will continue its due diligence before issuing a final pronouncement on the admissibility of Morena's complaint. The INE stressed its legal obligation to process complaints from legitimate parties and conduct thorough investigations to determine the appropriate course of action according to the law.

“

Requiring information to analyze a complaint does not constitute censorship or sanction; it is a necessary preliminary diligence to determine what is appropriate according to law.