On the afternoon of this October 22, Senator Adán Augusto López presented an initiative to modify articles 1, 103, 105 and 107 of the Constitution to prevent that when a reform is published there cannot be any amparo lawsuit against it.
The proposal arose after the amparo lawsuits filed against the judicial reform, and the controversy between the president of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, and judge Nancy Juárez.
Although on repeated occasions the federal president has assured that a judge of the Judicial Branch cannot order anything against a reform approved and published in the Official Gazette of the Federation, The Juarista assures that she does have influence.
READ: Follow the Senate discussion LIVE: Reform of ‘constitutional supremacy’
Given this, the national leader of Morena, Luisa María Alcalde announced that a reform would be proposed so that no one is above the Constitution, which was called “Constitutional Supremacy.”
What is constitutional Supremacy?
In accordance with the reform project presented by Adán Augusto López, Gerardo Fernández Noroña, Ricardo Monreal, and Sergio Gutiérrez, members of Morena.
It is intended to reform the second paragraph of the first article:
It currently says: The norms relating to human rights will be interpreted in accordance with this Constitution and with international treaties on the matter, favoring people the broadest protection at all times.
With the reform: but in no case can they be disapplied through conventionality control.
Add article 103:
Addition: The reforms and additions to this Constitution, its form, procedure and substance, are exempt from the provisions of the previous sections, against which no trial or appeal is possible, in any case.
A last paragraph is added to article 105.
Addition: Constitutional controversies or unconstitutionality actions that seek to challenge the additions or reforms to this Constitution, including its deliberative, legislative and correlative voting process, as well as those that seek to challenge the resolutions or declarations of the competent authorities on the matter, are inadmissible. electoral.
While the first paragraph of article 107 is reformed:
It currently says: The sentences pronounced in amparo trials will only deal with complainants who have requested it, limiting themselves to protecting and protecting them, if appropriate, in the special case about which the lawsuit is based. In the case of amparo proceedings that resolve the unconstitutionality of general norms, in no case will the sentences issued establish general effects.
Addition: The amparo trial will not proceed against additions or reforms to this Constitution, including its deliberative, legislative and correlative voting process, as well as those that seek to contest the resolutions of the competent authorities in electoral matters.
Given Morena’s modifications to the Constitution, some judges, magistrates, as well as members of the opposition have accused the ruling party of wanting to impose a dictatorship.
“Why is Morena accelerating a new constitutional reform to tie the hands of the Judiciary and to annihilate the pro-person principle?” wrote lawyer Roberto Gil Zuarth on social networks.
EE
