Persecution of journalists and media in Chiapas 
Newspapers in Chiapas under the microscope
By José Luis Castillejos Ambrosio (*)
Monday May 2, 2011 at 20:18
The apparent innocent 9 lines analyst who wrote the Jesus H. Perez, in his column "will be the serene" about the eventual "coming" of Jesus Alejo sugarcane producer for Orantes Ruiz Chiapas rule
generated a warning of punishment, by the Electoral Supervisory Commission (COFEL) which seeks, at all costs, curbing the early acts of pre-campaign or political campaign prohibited by Article 338, Section I, Elections Code and Citizenship of the State of Chiapas.
The commentary released in digital versions of the media: Freedom in Chiapas, Chiapas and diariomeridiano90.blogspot.com Quadratin has nothing undermining structures or institutions threatens the stability of that state will soon be thriving in a new electoral party to designate a successor to current president, Juan Sabines Guerrero.
The text that prompted the request for explanations from the managers COFEL Freedom in Chiapas "is:" Well yesterday, rose to fore, the Chief Jesus Alejo Orantes Ruiz, as the first attempt to replace the governor Juan Sabines Guerrero state government, 2012, at a ceremony held in Lying Laja community, municipality of Venustiano Carranza, where he introduced his program 'The light of the poor', with promises to lead productive projects, works and resources for indigenous communities and peasants. "
Could it be that the COFEL resented the label of `chief 'Jesus H. saddled him Perez, the powerful sugarcane Orantes Ruiz Jesús Alejo? Or is it an attempt to heat the `COFEL available immediately suspend the dissemination of publicity or propaganda libelous, slanderous or damaging to the image of political parties, coalitions, candidates, candidate, electoral authorities, general government or any institution connected with the electoral process?
to where it says in the letter from the journalist, there's probably acts early pre-campaign or campaign, banned and which will begin a regular procedure of investigation.
Rather
reveals that journalists write about election issues will, from now on, as they have always been in the crosshairs of the Electoral Supervisory Commission (COFEL) and whose zeal could be a real obstacle to the freedom expression.
repeat here what I have written to illustrate another case: With the criticism is willing to "kill the messenger. In antiquity it was a very widespread practice of executing the messenger of the day that news reports were not like the King.
Legend in eastern King was a very cruel, unjust and cruel and annoy anyone who tempt him immediately destroyed. Each time I received a messenger from the confines of his kingdom, if it brought him bad news immediately made him kill. Confusing the message with the messenger and the shadow reality of it, did anyone dare to tell what really happened. It was so not even aware that there was no longer king. Such was the panic that caused even such comments as it condemned their people to death or the executioner dared to tell the sentence for fear of him executed.
wonder why the record number Cofel/POI/002/2011, Technical Secretary, Office Number Cofel/ST/093/2011, Tuxtla Gutierrez, signed by Mr., Marlon Castellanos Molina which says to apply 300 days of minimum wage of fine electronic newspaper "Chiapas in Freedom" in case they ignore a request by you for explanations, very confusing indeed.
The document dated April 27 just after the Easter dates that atones for his sins everyone asks the director of "Freedom in Chiapas" to report to the Commission Electoral Control (COFEL) if that means that the note was published. Is one who asks the question did not read it there and that led to their "research" weak?
Calls also stating whether it is an interview and if someone paid for the same, the quantity and the degree of coverage the news media.
Here is a total ignorance of who makes the request for explanations: first because it is a digital media and its coverage is global. Even in the farthest corner of the world where the Internet can read what you wrote the columnist, and second, is a mere comment, and suddenly the excess of the writer is called "Cacique" but their will and third reasons can not have copies because it is a version digital, online, ie, they account for visits and not volume on paper.
This is an unusual letter in which the signer is not researched and very badly, because as an officer, his first feature, despite the redundancy of the term , is to find out what is going to punish it, otherwise who would be drawing attention to pretend he is undermining the principles of freedom of expression that have been so difficult to defend.
Complaints, and must know, comes after it initiated by a political party, who has a complaint or an informal disciplinary procedures will engage against political parties or coalitions.
Judging by the nine lines of the column there is no anticipated acts likely pre-campaign or campaign, prohibited by Article 338, Section I, the Election Code and Citizenship of the State of Chiapas, which may have initiated the so-called "Normal Procedure Research.
Therefore, it is not established the administrative responsibility of the journalist and therefore the warning is a kind of "estate" still "against the media who wish to criticize the candidates or pre-empt the unveiling.
In any case the officer asks for explanations to explain it if their research is based on the possible violation of Articles 223, 224, section I and 225, first paragraph, of the Elections Code and Citizenship, to have evidence of conducting pre-campaign anticipated events, and, if in accordance with Article 206, Section I of the Code on Elections and Citizen Participation, the media broadcast journalist column could have committed acts that might be anticipated from pre-campaign actions performed.
Degree Now Marlon Molina Castellanos must show what evidence discussed above and under what legal and logical reasoning approach which threatens to punish the media that published a commentary on a supposed "coming out" of sugar cane producer.
Unless someone has advised the staff badly and has assumed that digital media was guilty of unlawful conduct and, therefore, perform an action prohibited by Electoral Act and therefore would be subject to administrative responsibility.
things should be clear now before unleashing a hunt against journalists.
Lords of COFEL are wanting to punish the messenger, it is feasible and reasonable for greater communication and that you give to journalists, the scope for these to know when someone may commit an offense.
The suggestion is that before investigating the "messenger", to investigate the cane producer if this was ahead of the times and, if so, what sanctions becomes entitled.
joseluiscastillejos@gmail.com
