Gustavo Castillo and César Arellano
La Jornada newspaper
Thursday, September 18, 2025, p. 4
The flexibility given by the law to file amparos by Inteposita Person, without the need for the alleged aggravated to certify his lawsuit from the moment he appears before the Judicial Power of the Federation (PJF), has given an unscrupulous foot to which numerous people are involved as alleged participants in crimes, said lawyers Luisyasser and Mauricio Flores.
They stated that the Amparo Law allows any citizen or lawyer to request the protection of federal justice through a trial of guarantees in the name of a third party, although the alleged beneficiary has not required it.
The judicial authority must grant the provisional suspension provided that the complaint is related to “acts that import in danger of deprivation of life, attacks on personal freedom outside of procedure, incommunication, deportation, expulsion, banishment, extradition, forced disappearance of persons or any of those prohibited in article 22 of the Constitution”, which accommodates fraud to the law, warned.
In that context, the most recent case was recorded yesterday, when two federal courts, one based in Mexico City and another in Zacatecas, granted suspensions against any arrest warrant – without evidence that he supported that the request was made by the brothers Andrés Manuel and Gonzalo López Beltrán, children of former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador -, which is “a hoax and a downhill of those who presented the writings. Some middle rimbombantes names to harm them, ”said the litigants.
They explained that in cases where there is a risk of committing a violation of the rights established in the Magna Carta, “the suspension will be decreed in the order to admission to the demand, communicating without delay to the responsible authority by any means that allows to achieve its due compliance.”
Yasser said that lawyers or citizens have the right to request the protection of federal justice on behalf of a third party, but in the Amparo Law there are prevention that lead to reveal that the demand can be a deception, “and this will happen when the authorities mentioned as probable responsible for stop detention or have issued a commandment), since the beneficiaries are required to be made available to the authority that processed the suspension.
“The lock is that when justified report is given, the person who is requesting the amparo confirms that he is the lawyer of the person who allegedly demanded it, and the alleged applicant for protection is also obliged to ask to appear. The suspension forces you to inform you that it should be appealed before the court that admits or give by the way the claimed act.”
Meanwhile, Flores stressed that in certain cases, any lawyer can go to a court to require an amparo for a person without authorization, and that a request for a suspension is generated.
“Such was the case of the children of former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Anyone can, putting certain data, sustain themselves as their representative and had to process him. I understand that that happened, surely without them knowing it. It is a baseness what they did. They put some half -rimbombant names to harm them.”
He said that although a crime could be incurred, the amparo law does not punish these actions. “We will have to see the demand, but surely who did it said to have some legitimacy to promote it, which they do not have.”
He added that in case the claim is not ratified, the judges can discard it. “In this case, as a signature did not bring, the judge only decreed the suspension of flat. That is what will happen, which is discarded because there will be no matter or, where appropriate, because the claimed acts are denied. Who processed this lawsuit wants to harm the children of the former president and link them with groups of which they are completely oblivious.”
In accordance with article 261 of the Amparo Law, a penalty of two to six years in prison and a fine of 30 to 300 days will be imposed to the person who has the character of complainant or third party, to his lawyer or both, if in the amparo trial, knowingly, he presents false or painfully altered parts for the purpose of obtaining a benefit for the complaints or harming the third interested party.
