The reforms to the Amparo Law What Morena proposed They went to the last customs of the Congress of the Union, when the opinion was approved in the Plenary Session of the Chamber of Deputies. It has already been sent to the federal Executive for publication.
In the vote, 254 votes were obtained in favor, 204 against and zero abstentions.
After it was endorsed, in general, with 258 votes in favor of Morena and its allies of the PT and PVEM and 213 against the opposition of the PAN, PRI, MC and PRD, and 86 “reservations” or proposals of modification, mainly from the opposition, and without a single one being accepted, the opinion that reforms articles 129 and 148 of the Amparo Law, the regulatory law of articles 103 and 107 of the Constitution, was ready.
The reform – already approved in the Senate of the Republic – limits the resolutions of judges and magistrates and prevents them from immediately suspending lawswithout the in-depth analysis of the Supreme Court on its eventual unconstitutionality.
After rejecting four suspensive motions from the PAN, PRI, MC and PRD to withdraw the opinion from the Agenda, in defense of this reform, Juan Ramiro Robledo, from Morena, and president of the Constitutional Points Commission, explained that the reform was does because “Nowhere in the Constitution and the laws are courts authorized to suspend a law with general effects.”without knowing if the claimed act is true, without having asked the authority if it accepts that the claimed act exists and without having studied it.”
This reform – he explained – “is good for the division of Powers, for the certainty of the rule of Law in Mexico, for the order of the Republic, so that the instrument of defense of human rights and the Constitution, which is protection, be preserved, but not used for partisan political purposes”.
“Judicial interpretation has given itself powers that are not in Mexican law,” he said. And the other thing, “it is about removing enormous discretion from the protection judges to ignore the violations of social interest and public order that are in the Protection Law itself.”
The deputy also announced that in Morena “we are going to propose that a Chamber, that of Deputies or Senators, Congress, with two thirds, can revoke the invalidity of a ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice regarding a law.”
Also, “We are going to propose that there be an early consultation with the Supreme Court before issuing a ruling to avoid all these discussions.”
In response, amid shouts and demands, with “Justice for all” banners, the opposition rejected the technical explanation and disqualified the reform.
Deputy Ricardo Villarreal García, from the PAN, indicated that, according to specialists, The reform violates the human rights of Mexicansand you are lying when you say that it is not restricted the amparo trial.
“It is serious because people who have less are prohibited from obtaining a suspension when unconstitutional regulations are created.”
Sergio Hernández Ferriño, PRI deputy, highlighted that the principles of progressivity are violated and it is a serious legal setback that endangers the operation of the Judiciary, and today the power to declare unconstitutionality through an amparo trial is eliminated. , since this figure is one of the great contributions of Mexican law.
Deputy Vania Roxana Ávila García, from MC, said that they oppose the reform because it is a danger to democracy, in addition to seeking to crown a dogmatic and populist state. She regretted that today steps are being taken despite the fact that Mexico has made progress in the progressiveness of human rights.
“It is essential that judicial independence is protected and access to justice is guaranteed for all citizens,” he said.
José Juan Barrientos Maya, of the PRD, announced the vote against his parliamentary group because it is an “attack” on the freedoms and guarantees of millions of Mexican men and women.
With the modification, it is intended that the act of authority is not suspended and that each person presents their own judgment and carries out their own procedure; This will cause the violations to extend for years, complicating the repair of damages.
The PT deputy, Benjamín Robles Montoya, denied that the reform is an attack against the amparo trial and that people’s access to this means of protection will be limited.
A stop is put to the abuse of the Judicial Power and the abuses of judges who, through the suspension of the claimed act, do something that they cannot, which is to suspend a law with general effects.
María de Lourdes Macías Martínez, from the PVEM, said that the reform will eliminate the general effects of the suspension in amparo proceedings against laws, thereby reducing the margin of discretion of the jurisdictional bodies.
