The Amparo Law was modified, among other changes, with the inclusion of article 61, section III, to establish that the amparo trial is inadmissible against the acts of the judicial administration body and the Court of Judicial Discipline.
That is, the judges who are submitted to procedures and sanctions by that court, in accordance with the judicial reform, may not protect themselves.
In article 73 it was established that in the case of amparo judgments that resolve the unconstitutionality in general norms, “in no case the sentences that will be distant will be with general effects.”
In the discussion, the opposition accused that in the events “the amparo disappeared” and with the decision is the transit to an authoritarian regime.
Neither Human Rights, established deputy Margarita Zavala, National Action (PAN), could be enough to protect citizens’ sets in the case of unconstitutional reforms.
And the judges who are pursued for not serving “the interests of power,” he accused.
This “is one of the great betrayals to the history of amparo, to the history of jurists, men and women of Mexico, who fought for the greatest guarantee of human rights in our country,” he said.
With this reform, PRI deputy Arturo Yáñez Cuéllar said, “what will happen is that whoever has money will promote an amparo and do so, and will declare himself unconstitutional, but the effects only benefit who promoted the protection. ”
Gibrán Ramírez, of the Citizen Movement (MC), accused that with the changes it is not first thought of the poor, referring to former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
In addition there are setbacks in the other means of constitutional control, he stated, since in article 14 the possibility of temporarily suspending unconstitutional norms was eliminated.
With this “if Congress approves a reform that limits freedoms or eliminates rights, it cannot be suspended by the Supreme Court, as is the case in the model that is being thrown down.”
To that is added, he explained that in article 19 a new cause of inadmissibility is added to establish that “constitutional reforms may not be challenged through constitutional disputes or unconstitutionality actions.”
For all these reasons he questioned that Morena assured that there were abuses of the Judiciary to stop and now the abuses will be from the legislative.
“If in the heart of the constitutional control figures it was avoiding the abuses of the Legislative, today impunity is given to the abuse of the Legislative,” he accused.
