Morena accused of creating a "spy government" with reforms

The opposition bloc in Baja California has sounded the alarm. Federal Representative Eva María Vázquez Hernández denounced that the reforms to the telecommunications law, promoted and approved by the Morena majority, create a legal framework for a "spy government."

The political arena in Baja California has heated up following the approval of a package of telecommunications reforms. Opposition legislators accuse these changes, far from serving the common good, of violating citizens' privacy and laying the groundwork for a system of mass surveillance by the state.

The strongest voice against these measures has been that of Eva María Vázquez Hernández, a federal representative for the National Action Party (PAN). In a forceful statement, she asserted that the reforms approved by the majority of Morena and its allies create a "spy government."

According to Vázquez Hernández, the legal changes grant the government excessive powers to access citizens' private data under the pretext of security, without adequate judicial checks and balances. This, he argues, violates fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, such as the right to privacy and the protection of personal data.

The reforms in question are part of a series of legislative changes that the ruling party has pushed through at the federal level. Although they are argued to seek to modernize the legal framework and combat crime, critics point out that the wording is ambiguous and dangerous.

This debate is not new in Mexico. The use of spyware like Pegasus during past administrations has left society deeply distrustful of how the government handles surveillance and intelligence. Recently, former President Enrique Peña Nieto returned to the spotlight when he rejected accusations of receiving bribes for contracts involving this software.

"The reforms approved by Morena create a 'spy government,' violating the freedoms and privacy of all Mexicans," said Representative Vázquez Hernández in a statement.

The complaint has found echo in various sectors of civil society and other opposition parties, who see these reforms as an attempt to consolidate hegemonic power and silence dissent.

For their part, Morena legislators defend the reforms, asserting that they are necessary tools to guarantee national security and that their implementation will be carried out in strict compliance with the law.

The debate is on the table: where does the need for state security end and the inalienable rights of the individual begin? The implementation and potential injunctions against these reforms will set the tone in the coming months.