Lawyer Paulo Diez Gargari stated that former presidential legal advisor Julio Scherer, in his book 'Neither Vengeance Nor Forgiveness, A Friendship on the Edge of Power,' contradicts himself regarding the so-called 'agreement of shame,' related to the exploitation of the Bicentennial Viaduct, and therefore decided to present the book as supervening evidence in a lawsuit. Diez Gargari explained in an interview on Aristegui en Vivo that he decided to incorporate Julio Scherer's book as evidence because he detected a fundamental contradiction. In May 2025, Julio Scherer filed a moral damages lawsuit against Diez Gargari in which he affirmed that neither he nor President López Obrador had participated or had knowledge of the 'agreement of shame'; however, in his book, he recognizes that it was the president who instructed the signing of the agreement. The lawyer quoted the exact passage from the book that motivated its presentation as evidence. Unlike what he had previously maintained, it was President López Obrador who ordered that the 'agreement of shame' be signed, instructing Secretary Arganis to carry it out. 'I had to buy the book, analyze it and present it as supervening evidence, because there it reflects what he himself has said publicly and what he now seems to contradict; this is relevant to the lawsuit because it shows inconsistencies that cannot be ignored,' explained Diez Gargari. The 'agreement of shame,' according to the lawyer, is an agreement promoted by Scherer during his time at the Secretariat of Infrastructure, Communications and Transport (SICT), through which Aleatica was allowed to continue the exploitation of the Bicentennial Viaduct, a national public good that, according to Diez Gargari, lacks a valid federal concession. 'When I questioned this and filed lawsuits and complaints, Julio always said publicly that neither he nor the president participated in the agreement. Now, in the book, he recognizes that it was the president who instructed the signing. What Scherer recognizes in his book is of public and legal interest, and that's why I presented it as evidence,' he concluded. The lawyer reiterated that he will follow the corresponding legal processes and that the documentary evidence will be key for the courts to determine responsibilities. Likewise, Diez Gargari left open the possibility of a public, educational, and rational debate with Scherer about the facts narrated, with the presentation of documents and arguments, allowing society to draw its own conclusions. 'This demonstrates a clear and relevant contradiction,' he said. He also emphasized that the lawsuits against him seem to seek pressure and wear and tear, rather than justice. 'These processes do not seek justice; they seek to torment whoever speaks uncomfortable truths. I will file a complaint for procedural fraud, because Scherer lied before a judge and then publishes the opposite in his book, this has legal implications,' added Diez Gargari. Diez Gargari insisted that the publication of the book also represents a missed opportunity for public debate. 'Julio had the opportunity to generate an open debate about decisions that affect public goods, he did not do it, it would be positive if he accepted a documented and public debate where society can form its own opinion,' he pointed out. The lawyer explained that, although he did not read the entire book, he did review the key passages that directly touch his case. 'I have read sections where Scherer addresses the Bicentennial Viaduct and the decisions made in the Secretariat, there are contradictions with what he testified in the courts, and that makes it valid supervening evidence; I am not using the whole book as evidence, only the relevant fragments that show inconsistencies,' he clarified. Diez Gargari added that the relevance of the book lies in clarifying facts that affect public administration and national assets. 'This is not opinion or a literary account. It is a document that proves he was aware of the instruction and did not act to prevent it,' he concluded.
