Security Provision

Under a provision of the general security reform passed by the Mexican Senate, in four years, it will be a crime to hire a police officer of "doubtful honorability or low-confidence antecedents." (Love the wording.) The penalties for failing to conform to the new law would be prison sentences of two to eight years.

This seems like a bold plan with a reasonable time frame. The next step is to make sure that those hiring the police have the tools they need to conform with the law, especially function criminal databases and the money to hire to competent cops.

It is, however, incomplete, and I worry about the feasibility of jailing mayors for hiring dirty cops. What does conforming to the law entail? Merely cross-checking the name of an applicant against a blacklist? Or an exhaustive background check, like they do for people who are going to get an upgrade in security clearance? The former seems too easy to get around, while the latter seems cost-prohibitive. Also, what happens if a mayor hires a slate of clean cadets, only to do nothing as they sell themselves one by one to a local drug gang? Based on what I've read (which is based more on anecdotes than on comprehensive evaluation), that appears to be the most common route to corrupt police, not the hiring of already rotten apples. Under the provision, such negligence wouldn't be punished, unless I misunderstand.