Since president Felipe Calderón started his policy of “mano dura” against the drug cartels in 2006, Mexico has seen unprecedented internal violence – with the total number of casualties having exceeded 45.000 in 2011.
Assuming that the Mexican conflict is a war, subsequent questions can be asked with respect to a classic of political theory. Alexis de Tocqueville observed the natural tendency of central governments to reach out for more power in times of war. He further specified this statement by claiming that particularly the executive branch gains power in such situations. A democratic nation would be subject to this behavior, because it perceives the central executive as “the only power which appears to be intrinsically sufficiently strong, enlightened, and secure, to protect [it] from anarchy.”
Here, the Mexican case provides the analyst with further particularities. Not only follows the country’s executive the logic of presidential system, but also is it still on the democratic recovery from a long-term authoritarian one-party-rule. This paper briefly examines the drug war’s impact on the Mexican constitutional reality and thus aims at answering the question: What effect does the conflict have on the power endowment of the Mexican executive?
In order to validate the hypothesis, that the president’s power is gradually strengthened, the author chose a rather linear approach. After first introducing key data about the Mexican drug war, the institutional legacies of more than 70 years of one-party-rule are discussed. With the president’s power having been on decline since a process of democratization gathered pace in 2000, various aspects of today’s situation are understandable only by scrutinizing the consequences of previous “arrangements” between the ruling party and the drug traffickers. The paper’s third part is dedicated to examining the executive’s endeavors to extend its powers via the use of federal forces out of their original jurisdiction as well as via the creation of states of emergency without legal basis – both with dire consequences for the constitutional order of the Mexican state. Finally, the findings are summarized and the conclusion is drawn that the militarized law enforcement notably has power-shifting effects on the Mexican decision-makers and may complicate the further consolidation of the nation’s democracy.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. The Drug War
III. Institutional Legacies and Presidential Power
IV. (In-)Formal Extension of Executive Power
V. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper investigates the impact of the ongoing conflict between the Mexican government and drug cartels on the constitutional reality and the power distribution within the Mexican state, specifically examining whether the executive branch has expanded its authority during this crisis.
- Historical institutional legacies of the one-party-rule (PRI).
- The evolution of the "Drug War" as a multi-layered security challenge.
- Mechanisms of informal executive power extension and the use of the military in domestic affairs.
- The erosion of legislative oversight and the undermining of Mexican federalism.
- The tension between security demands and democratic consolidation.
Excerpt from the Book
IV. (In-)Formal Extension of Executive Power
As stated above, the president’s power in this newly democratizing Mexican system had been on the decrease. Actually, after the 2000 election, it could even be spoken of a “legislative paralysis” during the Fox administration. Arguably, this paralyzed situation encompassed also legislation regarding the handling of accretive cartel violence. Since Felipe Calderón campaigned with new approaches to be found in order to get rid of this problem, he definitely had to overcome the legislative stalemate after his election.
He did so by seeking to exercise extraordinary powers, which are not unrestrictedly encompassed by his office. The most striking example for this development is the mere use of military in domestic matters. Since it appeared so natural that increasing violence needs to be fought with adequate (military) firepower, it was deliberately unnoticed that such a measure would legally take place only in the case of an estado de excepción (state of emergency). Within this state of emergency, constitutional civil rights are suspended and the military can not only be used internally but also has far-reaching administrative competences.
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: The introduction outlines the escalation of the drug-related violence in Mexico and sets out the research question regarding the effect of this conflict on the power endowment of the Mexican executive.
II. The Drug War: This chapter describes the shift in Mexico’s counter-drug policy since 2006, analyzing the multi-layered conflict between cartels and the state following the collapse of the traditional clientelist system.
III. Institutional Legacies and Presidential Power: The author discusses the historical context of the PRI-led state and how the transition to democracy and the legacy of military autonomy influenced current presidential power dynamics.
IV. (In-)Formal Extension of Executive Power: This section examines how the executive branch has bypassed legislative constraints by utilizing the military in domestic affairs and creating de facto states of emergency.
V. Conclusion: The conclusion summarizes the findings, arguing that the drug war has contributed to an informal strengthening of executive power and has hindered the consolidation of Mexican democracy.
Keywords
Mexico, Drug War, Executive Power, Felipe Calderón, PRI, Institutional Legacies, Democratization, Military, Federalism, State of Emergency, Organized Crime, Political Power, Constitutional Reality, Legislative Paralysis, Security Policy
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines how the ongoing "Drug War" in Mexico has affected the power balance within the national government, specifically looking at how the executive branch has potentially expanded its authority.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The core themes include the impact of institutional legacies of the one-party system, the role of the military in domestic security, the weakening of legislative and federalist structures, and the challenges to democratic consolidation.
What is the main research question?
The author seeks to answer what effect the drug-related conflict has on the power endowment of the Mexican executive.
Which methodology does the author employ?
The author uses a linear, analytical approach, combining historical analysis of the PRI era with a scrutiny of contemporary security policies and constitutional practices under the Calderón administration.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The main body covers the transition of the Mexican state from a PRI-dominated system to a democracy, the rise of cartel violence, the military’s involvement in domestic law enforcement, and the resulting shift in power toward the president.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include Mexico, Drug War, Executive Power, Democratization, Military, Federalism, and Institutional Legacies.
How does the author explain the use of the military in domestic affairs?
The author argues that the president, facing legislative stalemates and an ineffective local police force, deployed the military as a means of last resort, often creating a de facto state of emergency without formal parliamentary approval.
What is the author's conclusion regarding the effect on democracy?
The author concludes that the informal expansion of executive power and the reliance on non-democratic practices like the internal use of the military may complicate the consolidation of Mexican democracy.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Daniel Helwig (Autor:in), 2012, The Drug War's Impact on the Mexican Executive Power, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/187289
