CASE BREAK : JUSTICE ORDERS FOR CRIME OF STATE? What was Felipe Calderon
Posted on 23/02/2011 at 12 : 09 by joelmekhantar
Sunday, February 27, 2011
How To Make Your Own Anodes
Two days before the rejection of the amparo BREAK Florence, the site of the Mexican presidency shows Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, President of the United States from Mexico, spirited dialogue with the President the Supreme Court, Juan Silva Meza.
What will they say? We know nothing except that they refer to the need to enhance collaboration between the executive and the judiciary as shown in the statement accompanying the photo on the presidential website.
http://www.presidencia.gob.mx/index.php?DNA=85&page=1&Prensa=15154&Contenido=63105
This collaboration will until she what Felipe CALDERON has directly lobbied the Mexican justice for the rejection of the amparo Florence BREAK?
That is the conclusion reached ARAIZAIGA Jose Carrasco and Homero CAMPA in a newspaper article entitled "Proceso" Scancale BREAK: everything for Garcia Luna "(February 19, 2011).
Proceso The newspaper reveals that according to leaks from La Residence des Pins (equivalent to the Elysee Palace in Mexico), the secretary of President Calderon told the President of the Supreme Court if Florence BREAK is found innocent, then not only would fall by the Secretary of Public Security, Genaro Garcia Luna, but the Mexican government's fight against organized crime. "It is therefore understandable that in these circumstances of amparo could neither Florence BREAK be seriously considered, nor has let alone succeed.
Yet the case against Florence case is not only empty but it shows a montage of Genaro Garcia Luna sordid and his accomplices with his right arm Luis Cardenas PALOMINO that we recognize the Mexican television report on the arrest of Florence BREAK rigged.
can hypothesize that the AFI did not result in the fight against organized crime ( indeed one wonders who is organizing the crime! ) has produced and directed people presented live like criminals on television.
Florence BREAK is arrested Dec. 8 2005 with her ex-boyfriend while Israel VALLARTA motor. The next day they will be taken to the ranch to be shown on television as live orders. Now, just watch the television to see Reporting PALOMINO Louis Cardenas, Garcia's right-hand LUNA open the door from inside the police making arrests in a so-called direct BREAK Florence while we repeat it, it had been arrested and detained by AFI since December 8, 2005
. Beyond the innocence of Florence BREAK orders that justice can not be established, it is obviously important to explore all legal votes that will ensure the triumph of the human human rights in this case, in particular:
http://www.corteidh.or.cr/
http://www.cidh.oas.org/DefaultE.htm .
France can also petition the International Court of Justice of the dispute with Mexico in this folder: http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/index.php
. It is especially important that France continues the authors assemble originally televised in violation of the presumption of innocence of Florence Cass in what appears increasingly like a crime State
. In this regard it is worth remembering that the French Criminal Code. According to Article 113-7 of the Penal Code, "French criminal law applies to any crime and any crime punishable by imprisonment, committed (...) by an alien outside the territory of the Republic where the victim is a French national at the time of the offense
. Genaro Garcia Luna, Director of AFI who mounted the operation staged by the arrest of Florence BREAK, and his right arm, Luis Cardenas PALOMINO
. Genaro Garcia Luna, Director of AFI who mounted the operation staged by the arrest of Florence BREAK, and his right arm, Luis Cardenas PALOMINO
must already be prosecuted before the French courts. The first because it was organized and sponsored this operation and he has acknowledged that it was a fitting before the Mexican television during the broadcast when Florence BREAK called Live from prison denying having was arrested Dec. 9, the latter because it is actually participated as evidenced by the Mexican television report on the arrest pseudo live.
regards Genaro Garcia Luna, is currently Minister, the question arises of the competent criminal court in France because "Government members are criminally liable for acts performed in the exercise of their functions and defined as crimes or offenses when they were committed" (Constitution Art. 68-1). When Mr. Garcia Luna has orchestrated his arrest, he was not yet a minister. Finally he was acting as an agent of a foreign public authority and, in our opinion, it does not fall within the Court of Justice of the Republic but ordinary criminal justice as any foreigner who commits a crime or a crime where the victim is French.
To that the French victim act requires that the offense committed by Genaro Garcia Luna and Luis Cardenas PALOMINO either as a serious offense or whether a crime punishable by imprisonment. In this regard, several provisions of the Penal Code are prima facie applied. We give a short list below.
BREAK Florence was the victim of arbitrary detention , already in breach not only of Article 16 of the Mexican Constitution, but also of Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is also sanctioned by the French Criminal Code article 224-1
which provides: "The fact without orders of the constituted authorities and except as provided by law, to arrest, kidnap, detention or imprisonment of any person, is punishable twenty years' imprisonment
.
.
assumed that lawyers are unable to demonstrate the arbitrary detention because of practical difficulties in establishing evidence that Mexico refuse to disclose to the judge in France responsible for investigating the trial of MM. Genaro Garcia Luna, Luis Cardenas PALOMINO and their possible accomplices, one thing is obvious is the
television editing the arrest of Florence BREAK. But
Article 226-8 of the Penal Code would be applicable here television editing the arrest of Florence BREAK. But
. This article amended by Ordinance No. 2000-916 of 19 September 2000 - art. 3 (V) Official Journal of 22 September 2000 into force on 1 January 2002 provides: " A penalty of one year imprisonment and a 15,000 euro fine to publish the fact, by any means whatsoever, the montage with the words or image of a person without their consent, if not shown clearly that this is an installation or if not specifically mentioned.
When the offense under the preceding paragraph is committed through the press or by broadcasting, the specific legal provisions governing those matters are applicable in respect of the determination persons responsible. "
Finally why not see in these facts (arrest under conditions contrary to Article 16 of the
For this, we must not omit violation of Article 432-4 of the French Penal Code (amended by Ordinance No. 2000-916 of 19 September 2000 - Art. 3 (V) Official Journal of 22 September 2000 in force January 1, 2002) which states: " The fact of a person holding public authority or a public service mission, acting in the course of or in connection with the performance of his functions or mission, to order or perform an act arbitrarily intrusive to individual liberty is punishable by seven years' imprisonment and 100,000 euros fine .
When the act is a detention or retention lasting more than seven days , the penalty is increased to thirty years imprisonment and 450,000 euros fine
.
Here already some evidence for further so as not to limit this case to the defense of an innocent but also allow to continue and to try perpetrators of this crime of state.
Source:
http://joelmekhantar.centerblog.net/
http://joelmekhantar.centerblog.net/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment