▲ The few senators who came to the enclosure yesterday joined the 2025 National Simulation.Senate photo
Andrea Becerril
La Jornada newspaper
Saturday, September 20, 2025, p. 8
The presidential initiative in amparo requires “adjustments and even corrections”, especially at the points that have caused controversy, such as “legitimate interest”, or the inejection of sentences, commented the president of the Senate Legislative Studies Commission, Enrique Inzunza.
Retirement magistrate, said that together with the president of the other ruling commission, that of Justice, they will insist that if there is no open parliament, at least a conversation of one or two days is opened with litigants and academics experts in the field to give an open debate around that reform proposed by President Claudia Sheinbaum.
This, added the morenista, would allow the suspicions to be removed around some of the changes that are proposed in the initiative, which since the opposition have been disqualified and indicated as regressive:
The senator clarified that it is not about changing the spirit of that reform aimed at strengthening the amparo trial, “as a means of defense par excellence of citizens, which we can say that it is made in Mexico, because here she was born, but as President Sheinbaum has raised, it requires at the same time avoiding the excesses in which its application has been incurred.”
The most controversial issue is that of the so -called “legitimate interest”, referring to those who can go to the protection and that in the current legislation includes not only those who suffer a personal or direct grievance.
In the presidential initiative, he stated, although the concept established comes from criteria and jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Justice, “I am necessary to clarify it so that it does not become excessively restrictive.”
In the case of inejection of amparo sentences, he said that it is a fact that sometimes there is material or legal impossibility of public servants to comply with them.
However, in the chapter corresponding to the crimes of the initiative, “an acquittal is clearly and directly established, noting that criminal responsibility is not incurred when the public servant forced by the amparo accredits a material legal impossibility to comply with the execution.”
That, he added, should also be reviewed more carefully, “because it is not about sending signs that ultimately lead to protection of amparo could be questioned.”
