5 Comments

Mexican President objects to drug bill thanks to US pressure

May 6, 2006 by in Politics,Random,Stupid with 5 Comments

About a week ago we covered a story on Mexicos plans to allow certain amounts of drugs to be carried around like candy. The new law was to be passed as advocates stood confident that President Fox would add his sign of approval without question.

Apparently, Fox has denied to add his signature backing down from the idea of “decriminalizing” possession of marijuana, cocaine, and ectasy due to pressure from the US government.

A day after his office said he would sign the measure into law, Vicente Fox said yesterday he was sending the bill back to congress for changes to make it “absolutely clear” that the possession of drugs would still be a criminal offence.

US government raining on the parade?


  • Crateman

    Oh!!! Now I see….

    So now Mexico has to ask US for permission to pass laws? Wow!

    —

    Sarcasm aside, the US had nothing to do with the approval of the bill. Since the beggining, the bill had been predestined to fail, and I don’t recall the part where Fox said he would pass the bill.

    Stop watching movies or TV shows. The Mexico portrayed in the popular media it’s the scum of Mexico. It’s like saying that the US is a country filled with wifebeating-Nascar -loving rednecks. Believe me… Mexico is not a “huge bordertown”. Bordertowns suck big time and they wouldn’t be so damn insecure and illegal if there was no demand for illegal stuff (steroids, alcohol, drugs, etc.) from the US. It’s a shame that sometimes people don’t see the good parts of Mexico.

  • http://5thirtyone.com Derek

    Taken from the original article:

    The only step remaining was the signature of President Vicente Fox, whose office indicated he would sign the bill, which Mexican officials hope will allow police to focus on large-scale trafficking operations rather than minor drug busts.

    From what I gathered based on the original write-up, Fox was supposed to sign in approval of the law.

  • http://www.nathanieljc.com Nathaniel

    No surprise the U.S. used their leverage against this. Too bad.

  • http://smurfturf.net/ xSmurf

    That’s funny… it’s exactly what happened in Canada around 2 years ago. We were very close for decriminalizing possession of the cronics when suddenly the government came back on it’s decision due to pressure for our southern, right winged, friends. In my book that’s not what I call a friend, more like a fiend.

  • Ivan S

    The president hadn’t made any public pronouncements before the veto, but it was rumored that they submitted the specific doses mentioned in the law.

    The thing is, they probably didn’t expect the reaction of the media and the U.S. Under this law, the posession of certain amount of drugs was still held as a crime, it was just not to be punished. The current law (articles 195 through 198 of the Penal Code, I believe) is not much different: it states that drug addicts carrying small doses face no punishment. Since the definition of drug addict is quite hard to pin down, this law was supposed to clarify things and give additional powers to police below the federal level.

Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Write for us