Why Porfirio Díaz’s Remains Have Not Been Repatriated to Mexico

by Chief Editor

The remains of former president José de la Cruz Porfirio Díaz Mori have rested in the Montparnasse cemetery in Paris, France, since his death on July 2, 1915. Despite the passage of more than a century, the question of why he has not been repatriated to Mexico continues to spark complex family and political debates.

Family Concerns and Security Risks

Gabriela Bernal Pfennich, the tataranieta of Porfirio Díaz, has shared the family’s perspective on the potential return of the former president’s remains. Members of the Association of Descendants believe the figure of their ancestor is often targeted for partisan political use.

Bernal Pfennich noted that statements from recent governments have led to acts of vandalism against the tomb in Paris. Because of this, the family feels that they are not yet prepared for repatriation, expressing a concern that the tomb is not entirely secure even on French soil.

Did You Know? The Association of Descendants is currently responsible for paying the fees required for the permanence and maintenance of Porfirio Díaz’s tomb in the Montparnasse cemetery.

Whereas the family manages the upkeep of the site, Bernal Pfennich suggests that the public image of Díaz is evolving. She believes that new perspectives on his government periods are creating a fairer lens through which to judge his historical role, provided he is no longer associated with political parties.

A Stance of Neutrality

This cautious approach is mirrored by other family members. Ignacio Díaz Bossero, the bisnieto of the former president, stated that the family has decided not to involve themselves in official requests for repatriation.

Díaz Bossero maintains a neutral position, suggesting that the final determination should be left to the Mexican government and the people. He believes that while some individuals might voice disagreement with a return, the majority would likely support it.

Expert Insight: The reluctance of the Díaz descendants highlights a recurring tension in national history: the struggle to separate a historical figure’s administrative legacy from the volatile political narratives of the present. By remaining neutral, the family avoids becoming a tool for modern political signaling.

Political Initiatives for Repatriation

Despite the family’s distance from official petitions, there have been several political efforts to bring the remains back to Mexico. In 2015, PRI deputy Samuel Gurrión Matías proposed an initiative to the Permanent Commission of the Congress of the Union.

Director of INAH talks about returning Porfirio Díaz's remains to Mexico

Gurrión Matías argued that the state should complete the necessary procedures to repatriate the remains to Oaxaca. He described Díaz as a figure who has been defamed or misunderstood and suggested that a century after his death, it was an appropriate time to desmystify the distortions surrounding his image.

More recently, former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador also expressed support for the return. On January 17, 2024, he stated that all those who died abroad should return.

Future Outlook

Currently, the body of Porfirio Díaz remains in France. A potential return to Oaxaca could depend on future government intervention and the overall will of the Mexican population.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where are the remains of Porfirio Díaz currently located?

They are located in the Montparnasse cemetery in Paris, France.

Why is the family hesitant to repatriate the remains?

The descendants fear that the figure of Porfirio Díaz is used for partisan political purposes and have noted that government rhetoric has previously led to vandalism of the tomb in Paris.

Which political figures have advocated for his return?

In 2015, deputy Samuel Gurrión Matías proposed a formal initiative for repatriation to Oaxaca, and on January 17, 2024, former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador voiced his support for the return of those who died abroad.

Do you believe the repatriation of historical figures helps in understanding a nation’s past, or does it risk fueling modern political divisions?

You may also like

Leave a Comment