The main objective of the report on José Ramón López Beltrán, son of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, published by Mexicans Against Corruption and Impunity (MCCI) and Latinus is to demonstrate a possible conflict of interest, beyond showing a lifestyle, he stated. one of its authors.
A few days ago it was revealed how the president’s son lived in Houston, Texas. There he occupied two residences with a commercial value, each, close to a million dollars. One of them was owned by a senior manager of Baker Hughes, a company with which the Mexican government has current contracts for more than 151 million dollars.
Verónica Ayala, a journalist from the MCCI Research Unit explained that this company, which is listed on NASDAQ, has two current contracts with the AMLO government; one corresponds to a transexennial project awarded in the last part of Enrique Peña Nieto’s term.
“There is another that was assigned in mid-August 2019, this is important because the contract is awarded to the company in August and according to the information we found, using different databases, that residence has been occupied since September 2019 , that is to say, one month after this contract was assigned by the current federal administration”, he added.
Which shows, said Ayala, that “there is a direct relationship” since there is an issue that goes beyond personal life or a lifestyle “that has to do with the government, with public bidding with contracts that are being granting”.
The Federal Law of Administrative Responsibilities of Public Servants establishes in its article 8 that “there will be conflicting interests when the personal, family or business interests of the public servant may affect the impartial performance of their employment, position or commission.”
Yesterday, President López Obrador affirmed “that my children have no influence in this government, no contract is given to anyone recommended.”
For its part, the Baker Hughes company indicated that the property identified in the investigation has never been directly or indirectly owned or managed by Baker Hughes.
“The house is a private property that, according to public records, belonged to a former employee who left the company in 2019,” reads a note to the press. He also acknowledged that the former collaborator was not involved in the operations that the transnational has in our country.