The greatest source of pride for the so-called Fourth Transformation was always its promise of “courageous honesty.” We were told repeatedly that corruption would be swept away like a staircase—from the top down—and that, simply by the example of the nation’s leader, public officials would magically stop dipping their hands into the public treasury. Unfortunately, stubborn reality tells a different story. For the Mexican people, the painful lesson of Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s administration was not the disappearance of old corrupt practices, but the disappointing realization that the new saints of the political altar had nails just as long as their predecessors, with an alarming dose of incompetence added.
The greatest monument to this governmental hypocrisy bears a name that evokes nobility and social justice: Mexican Food Security (SEGALMEX). Created to support the country’s poorest farmers and strengthen food distribution, the agency ultimately became one of the most notorious corruption scandals of the administration. This is not based on rumors or inventions by opposition journalists; it concerns a financial shortfall that Mexico’s Superior Audit Office (ASF) estimated at more than 15 billion pesos. To put that figure into perspective, it surpasses the amount associated with the well-known “Master Scam” (Estafa Maestra) during Enrique Peña Nieto’s administration. In the end, those who presented themselves as champions of morality broke the very records of what they had condemned.
The alleged scheme at SEGALMEX was almost darkly absurd, were it not for the fact that the money involved was intended to provide food for the country’s poorest citizens. According to the allegations, officials awarded multimillion-peso contracts through direct awards to shell companies. Advance payments were reportedly made for sugar, meat, and milk that never arrived at government warehouses. One of the most controversial findings was that funds intended for food assistance programs had allegedly been invested in high-risk private financial instruments. In other words, resources intended to help vulnerable families were reportedly exposed to speculative investments.
Who was responsible? Here, the country’s political reality becomes especially contentious. Ignacio Ovalle, SEGALMEX’s first director and a veteran of Mexico’s political establishment, was publicly defended by President López Obrador, who argued that Ovalle was an honest man who had been deceived by subordinates. Critics questioned why the agency’s top official was not held directly accountable. Rather than facing criminal charges, Ovalle was reassigned to a position within the Ministry of the Interior (Secretaría de Gobernación). To many observers, this symbolized a system in which administrative failures at the highest levels often result in reassignment rather than punishment.
The Attorney General’s Office (FGR) later opened investigations after the scandal gained widespread public attention. Authorities arrested René Gavira Segreste, the agency’s former Director of Administration and Finance, along with several other officials and individuals linked to companies allegedly involved in the scheme. Critics, however, argued that the investigations primarily targeted lower-ranking participants while questions about higher-level responsibility remained unresolved. They also pointed to the slow pace of judicial proceedings in major corruption cases involving politically connected individuals.
For many observers, the controversy surrounding SEGALMEX reflected broader concerns about transparency during the federal administration. Although the government had pledged to reduce favoritism through competitive public bidding, a large percentage of federal contracts were ultimately awarded through direct procurement mechanisms. Officials frequently justified these decisions by citing urgency or national security, particularly for large infrastructure projects such as the Maya Train (Tren Maya) and the Dos Bocas refinery.
Audits of these projects identified cost overruns, budget modifications, and administrative irregularities that generated public debate. The cost of the Dos Bocas refinery increased substantially beyond its original estimate, while the Maya Train project faced legal and environmental challenges related to permits and construction. In some instances, the federal government declared projects to be matters of national security, limiting public access to certain information and drawing criticism from transparency advocates.
The role of law enforcement and investigative authorities also became a subject of debate. Critics argued that Mexico’s institutions have historically struggled to investigate complex financial crimes involving public officials. During López Obrador’s administration, the armed forces assumed expanded responsibilities, including management of customs facilities, airports, rail infrastructure, and other public assets. Supporters viewed this as a strategy to improve efficiency and security, while opponents argued that it reduced transparency because military institutions are subject to different disclosure rules.
For many citizens, the overall perception was one of disappointment. Critics argued that the justice system and internal oversight mechanisms did not consistently hold senior officials accountable. López Obrador himself acknowledged that SEGALMEX represented the principal corruption scandal of his administration, although he maintained that it was an isolated case. Opponents, however, argued that the scandal reflected broader structural problems involving accountability, institutional oversight, and political loyalty.
Many Mexicans were left with the feeling that the promised transformation became, in practice, more a change in political rhetoric than a fundamental change in public administration. According to this critical perspective, political actors changed parties and narratives, but allegations of corruption continued to emerge. Until security institutions and the justice system are perceived as operating independently and consistently, many citizens believe they will continue bearing the consequences of corruption while those ultimately responsible avoid meaningful accountability.
Source: mexicodailypost
