Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 10:00:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Jose A. Briones
<brioneja@ttown.apci.com>
To: Chiapas-L <Chiapas-l@profmexis.dgsca.unam.mx>
Subject: Six Principles for a New Mexican St (fwd)
Message-Id: <Pine.ULT.3.91.950106100034.9518B-100000@ttown.apci.com>
Precedence: bulk
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:41:36 -0500
Subject: Six Principles for a New Mexican St
From: Michael Robin <mrobin>
/* Written 5:17 PM Jan 3, 1995 by saiic in igc:reg.mexico */
/* ---------- Six Principles for a New Mexican St
---------- */
From: saiic (South and Meso American Indian Rights Center)
Subject: Six Principles for a New Mexican State
The following article is based on a proposal titled Six Principles
and Six Proposals
written by the Independent Indian Peoples Front
(FIPI) and the Committee for the Support and Defense of Indian Rights
(CADDIAC). After extensive consultations with Indigenous
organizations, FIPI contributed this document to the working
roundtables established at the National Democratic
Convention. Although written for Mexico, the analysis could apply to
the other Latin American states who conceive themselves to be mestizo.
Mestizo-craticstate
In Mexico, ethnic homogeneity was considered a necessary precondition
in the creation of the nation-state, and in consolidation of a market
economy. Indigenous peoples have therefore been subject to hostile
policies, ranging from physical extermination to Indigenista
strategies whose aim has been to assimilate us. As a result, we have
not had, as Indigenous peoples, a dignified place in Mexican
society. Not only has our right to exist as a collective entity been
denied, but also our rights as a peoples. Today, we continue living
under a neocolonial oppression promoted by the State and perpetuated
by mestizo people who benefit from this situation. They, in turn,
believe themselves to be the synthesis of the Mexican people, the
embodiment of the nation, and to have created a State in their image
and likeness; that is to say, a mestizo-cratic
State. Thus, by
the light of contemporary morality, the position of the Mexican State
and the mestizo peoples is illegitimate: both are based upon the
displacement and the abrogation of the rights of Indigenous peoples,
and upon excluding us from collective participation in the nation and
the state, which has bound us in a neocolonial relationship.
The constitution is a key source of the problems we face, and thus
must be modified. It was modified in 1992 in a way that was both
limited and has not been enforced. Additions to Article Four recognize
the plurality of the Mexican nation, but this plurality is not
reflected in the State, which should be structured in order to reflect
this fact. This problem is compounded by the fact that Indigenous
rights are located under Article Four, which guarantees individual
freedoms, rather than within the constitution's principal articles
(articles 39, 40, and 41, which have to do with sovereignty and the
forms of government, and articles 115 to 122, which establish the
basis for our federal structure). The location of our rights under
Article Four signifies the government's refusal to recognize our
collective rights as distinct peoples, recognizing only our individual
rights. This is a fundamental and significant difference, as it is not
the same thing at all to recognize that Mexico is a multiethnic nation
as it is to recognize that Mexico is a multinational state. This is
why the central project is to divest the constitution of its
mestizo-cratic
cast.
The ideal of federalism -for which thousands of citizens, Indigenous
and non-Indigenous, have struggled- has not been realized in our
country. From the very beginnings of the Republic, the Mexican people
agreed to constitute a federation; however, in practice our government
has been centralist, subject to an overly powerful presidency and to
the domination of the State by one party, leading in effect to a
dictatorship. In order to fulfill the precepts of federalism, it is
necessary to redefine the notion that through federation we shall
unify our diversity
. Although this is a valid concept, it does
not acknowledge nor include the continued presence of distinctive
peoples within a federation.
Thus indigenous peoples are left out of the federal structure of our
country. Some of the worst consequences of this exclusion are found in
the territorial re-organizations which decisively and negatively
impacted the social organization of the original peoples of this
land. From that moment to the present, Indigenous territories have
been continuously divided. The federalist policies did not take into
account the preexisting territories nor acknowledge them as a basis
for a re-organization. Instead, they were deeply genocidal, placing
Indigenous regions under the tutelage of the Indigenista
arm of
the government. Today the few remaining Indigenous territories face
new threats. The land redistribution that took place throughout the
country based on an ejido concept of occupancy, instead of on a
communitarian basis, has greatly affected the territorial rights of
Indigenous peoples. In many cases, the ejido continues to function in
a destructive and assimilationist manner in Indigenous
territories. The new reforms to Article 27 constitute a final blow
towards the dismemberment of Indigenous territories.
Justice will prevail for indigenous peoples only if there is democracy in the rest of the country. And democracy can exist only if governments are created that are respectful of diversity and able to share power, not only with different political parties but also with different ethnic groups. As Indigenous peoples we have often been denied the vote and been prevented both from choosing our own legitimate representatives as well as from exercising our right to represent others. As Indigenous peoples, we add our voices to the national clamor for democracy, yet we add that no democracy will be a true democracy if it does not resolve the anti-democratic relationship between Indigenous people and the power of the state, as exemplified in our ability to participate and be represented in the structures of government.
The road towards democracy must necessarily take us through a process of democratizing the relationships between Indians and non-Indians. It is urgent that as Mexicans we reach a new national accord, a new social covenant that is based on a new ethic of tolerance and respect towards diversity and plurality that will allow us to live together in peace. But this pact cannot rest only upon individual efforts or moral values; we believe that it must be affirmed by our Constitution. The State must address this covenant by creating the foundation for a democratic relationship between the State itself and the Mexican people; between the state and the Indigenous peoples; between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples; between the federation and the elements thereof; between the capital and the provinces; between the provinces and the Indigenous regions, etc.
It is not possible in this day and age to defend an ethnocratic nation-state. As we seek to give power to the people, we are led to question the legitimacy of the mestizo population being the sole holders of that power. The need for a transitional government means that we need to create a new national model that is no longer an ethnocratic nation-state, but instead a multi-national state. The creation of a truly multi-national state implies the acknowledgment of the free self-determination of Indigenous peoples, and the embodiment of those rights through the creation of autonomous regions.
Included within the six proposals are:
1)the constitutional recognition of Indigenous autonomy through the
formation of Autonomous Pluriethnic Regions
;
2) an addition to Article 42, and
3) to Article 43 of a section guaranteeing the existence of the Autonomous Indigenous Regions;
4) reforms to Article 115 to acknowledge the Autonomous Indigenous Regions (referred to as Pluriethnic Regions) as fundamental elements of the political and administrative structure of the country;
5) modifications to Article 73 and
6) modifications to Articles 52, 53, 54, 55, and 56, which refer to political participation, in order to redraw electoral districts in Indigenous regions. In this way, a sixth district will be drawn to provide for election of Indigenous congressmen and guarantee the presence of six Indigenous senators.