How Long Does It Take To Get Digital Copy From Ea

Marriage Migration

Migration
Note the double standards of the REFORM FOCUS

Although Mexico is the largest migration corridor in the world, the country lacks a policy to regulate this flow, experts criticize

By Martha Martinez

Mexico City (July 18, 2010) .- In migration, Mexico applies an double standards the U.S. government calls for respect for the Mexicans, but within the country, the Central Americans who enter without documents are victims of human rights violations, robberies, extortions and kidnappings.

Official figures indicate that, on average, each year more than half a million Mexicans and Central Americans moving to the northern border in an attempt to reach the United States.

Although this figure makes Mexico the largest migration corridor in the world, academics Fabienne Venet, director of the Institute of Migration Studies and Outreach, and Rodolfo Rubio Salas, a researcher at the Colegio de la Frontera Norte, say the country lacks a policy regulating this flow.

Experts say that the actions implemented by the Mexican government to address the phenomenon of migration to the United States are scattered, disorganized, inefficient and lack of clear goals, which leads to their response to violations of human rights of Mexicans are warm, late and ignored.

respect to the southern border indicate that government actions are focused on flow control, which favors the criminalization of undocumented migration, abuse and corruption among Mexican border agents, the rise of robbery and kidnapping as a business of organized crime and impunity in such acts.

While these problems are exacerbated, President Felipe Calderón protest against the possible entry into force of Law Arizona on July 29 and claim the White House and Congress together to promote comprehensive immigration reform.

Crisis on the southern border

Central level, Mexico has failed to implement a strategy to control migratory flows and its methods have been criticized internationally for generating the same human rights violations that Country complaint against his countrymen.

deaths, robberies, kidnappings, rapes, extortion, abuse by police elements and no access to justice have been documented by Amnesty International, which has warned that the border of Mexico, Central American migrants face a real crisis human rights.

Official figures realize that each year more than 100 thousand Central Americans, unofficial figures indicate that more than 250 thousand, enter the country with the aim of crossing into the United States. The majority come of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

Special Report on Abduction against migrants, released last year by the National Commission on Human Rights, reveals that in 6 months about 10 thousand Central Americans were kidnapped during their transit through Mexico.

The report indicates that in the commission of these crimes are involved in organized crime gangs and authorities, who obtained about 25 million dollars in ransoms.

Although the report notes that daily are 50 American hostages until now the Mexican government has announced measures to protect migrants. By

Otherwise, the points of robbery and kidnapping are moved from one place to another with the passivity of the Mexican authorities.

Ambassador of El Salvador in Mexico, Hugo Carrillo, gives an example.

"In Rice (Chiapas), the attacks have declined substantially in the last 4 or 5 months but have moved away, in Chahuites (Chiapas)."

The diplomat described another factor hindering the comprehensive care of the problem.

"From the first day he took office as Governor Juan Sabines in Chiapas, I took the trouble to go over and started talking about the tragedy of the migrants passing, mostly by the state of Chiapas. Federal authorities were not happy for the Governor was interested in the issue of migrants because there is a zeal "he says.

Antonio Diaz, chief of staff of the National Migration Institute, admits that another problem facing Central America is corruption of some Mexican authorities.

Diaz reports so far of the administration have been dismissed from the Institute about 400 people linked with corruption, of which 30 have been jailed.

"When we received the Institute we thought we were entering an institution that had corruption, in practice there are many good people, not me doubt, a few color the work of many, "he says.

reactive U.S. policy

On 20 May, in a speech to Congress, President Calderón said:" (Arizona Law ) is a law that not only ignores a reality that can not be eliminated by decree, but introduces the terrible idea that racial discrimination can be the basis for the application of the law. "

Mexican president's criticism was one month after the passage of SB1070, known as the Arizona law, which empowers state and local authorities to investigate the immigration status of a person when suspicions are "reasonable" manner that is illegal on U.S. soil.

A week after the speech (28 May), the Mexican Hernández Anastasio was beaten by 20 agents of the Border Patrol on the American side of the Puente Isidro-Tijuana. Three days later, he died due to brain damage that caused the electric shocks were applied to agents even though he was immobilized.

On 8 June, the 15 year old Sergio Adrián Hernández Guereca was murdered in Ciudad Juárez by a Border Patrol agent who shot him from the U.S..

Fabienne Venet, director Institute of Migration Studies and Outreach, says Calderón's speech, despite being praised in several sectors, and these two facts show that far from having an immigration policy, the federal government responds to the contingencies.

"There are a number of initiatives, but most are temporary and not sustained over time, then the immigration issue is still subject to the ups and downs of the relationship with the United States on other issues and suddenly the track rises to a pitch situation which is generally deplorable.

"If Mexico does not develop a firm position to offer, with a long-term vision and does not hold that view and those actions we will continue as now, reacting to situations, "notes the expert.

Figures from 2009 indicate that U.S. 11.9 million Mexicans live. According to the National Population Council, on average each year 400 million Mexicans try to cross the northern border , the majority come from Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacán, San Luis Potosi and Zacatecas. The main causes of migration are poverty, joblessness and low wages.

Mexicans and Mexican descent represent the group of non- the largest American country in the aggregate 30 million, or 10 percent of the population.

The swaying policy Venet

immigration ensures that Mexico has failed to design a migration policy towards the U.S. because although important bilateral initiatives promoted, he held no more than six years.

Two examples: in 1997, prompted the United States-Mexico Binational Study on Migration, whose goal was to have a common basis of understanding and data to address the issue bilaterally, the study is unique in its kind, although this was not continued by subsequent governments.

In 2006, former President Vicente Fox urged Mexico to Initiative migration. This is the only document that expresses a position comprehensive and consensus on immigration between the executive, legislative, civil society and academia. The proposals were not taken up by President Calderon. Venet

warns that the "culture of six-year, Mexico has not addressed the issue of immigration in an institutional manner.

"Today it is being mandated by the Ministry of the Interior Mexican immigration policies, to me it seems an aberration, was justified at the time ... obviously the environment today has changed completely, then it can be done by a institution because it is an issue that requires the concurrence of ministries responsible for issues such as work, social development, economy, the environment, because these are the causes of migration, "he says.

A review of the sectoral programs of different ministries and the National Population Programme shows that the federal executive does not pose a coordinated effort among agencies responsible for social development, employment promotion, development of the field or environment care to address migration.

This, despite the National Development Programme, the hub of government policy recognizes that " lack of opportunity and economic asymmetries are among the root causes of the rapid departure of human capital abroad, especially United States. "

By contrast, migration policy is relegated to the secretaries of Foreign Affairs and the National Migration Institute.

The

immigration reform impossible in their bilateral relations, Mexico has committed to immigration reform is unlikely to realize at least during the presidency of Barack Obama.

Rodolfo Rubio Salas, a researcher at the Colegio de la Frontera Norte, recalls that on his last visit to the White House, President Calderon called on Obama to push for a comprehensive immigration reform. The Obama's response was blunt: "I have 60 votes in the Senate."

Obama reiterated this warning during first speech on immigration reform on 1 July.

For Rubio Salas, this response is the explicit recognition of U.S. President that his government has other priorities, such as internal security, economic crisis and fiscal reform.

Scholar warns that even when Obama tried to promote immigration reform, his political capital was exhausted with the approval of the health system reform.

"I think when he said, President Obama was aware that much of his political capital he had spent on health care reform, where the Republican Party was against him, he had political capital to make up that to start trading and is also quite clear that there will be an important part of Congress who will not only be difficult to convince, but he believes it will never be able to convince, "he says.

The researcher argues that in the case of opened the debate on immigration reform in Congress, the negotiation will depend on how much Obama offers in terms of border security, because after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, migration was included in the internal security agenda that country.

Another factor against the midterm elections are Nov. 2 in the United States.

"It's an issue that can have political costs, perhaps some politicians are avoiding, but we also saw very strong stances, just from the debate that raised the Arizona law," said Fabienne Venet.

also warns that immigration reform is not the absolute solution to the problem, despite the importance he has given the Mexican government.

The specialist recommends that U.S. migration policy is not focused on the possible reform in that country, but the Mexican government to boost bilateral agreements for Mexican migrants and internally treats the causes of migration, such as poverty, unemployment and low wages. Venet

adds that Mexico and U.S. demand immigration reform should start the debate on the need to promote changes within the country to provide greater legal safeguards for American entrants allow its southern border and attempts to sketch the first State policy in this area.



Copyright © Grupo Reforma Servicio Informativo

CAN BE FOUND IN THIS NOTE:
http://www.reforma.com/enfoque/articulo/1130126/
Publication Date: 16-Jul-2010


'Yes migration policy is a '

The manager of the migration agenda in the Federation says there is congruence between what the U.S. called and offered to Central America. By Martha Martínez



Mexico City (July 25, 2010) .- According to the commissioner of the National Migration Institute, Cecilia Romero, Mexico has an immigration policy clear, consistent and advancing in the right direction.

However, recognizing that we still achieve a more responsive at all points of entry, both in the northern border on the southern border, the professionalization of migrant workers, ensuring respect for human rights of all migrants and the adoption of a law on migration that will be sent to Congress in September, nearly four years after this administration began.

Migration In response to the report: the double standard, published last week in Focus, the federal official says criticism of the Institute are respectable, but denies that there is no coordination with other government agencies to address the migration phenomenon, which lacks clear goals in this area and apply a double standard by violating human rights of Central Americans entering the country without documents while criticizing the treatment of Mexicans trying to enter the United States.

Commissioner says that it has been reduce the rate of violence in the southern border, but admits that these advances are overshadowed by the climate of hostility generated by the crimes committed by organized crime against migrants.

"We achieved that a large percentage decrease in the abuse of undocumented migrants. If we put on the other hand the rise of organized crime and international drug trafficking in persons, because sometimes all that is able to advance themselves is minimized a bit, "he says.

Beyond the effects of organized crime, the Commissioner indicates that the southern migration policy objective is "to make the border region and neighboring countries, a area prosperous, peaceful and safe. "

Among the actions that the Institute carries out to achieve that goal are the launch of a regularization program for foreigners who already have been residing in the country, implementing a form Local Visitor immigration which is free and allows foreign nationals to legally stay for three days, the immigration issue in a cross-border workers and a Memorandum of Understanding with the Southern countries of Central orderly repatriation to their places of origin.

Romero says that these measures will allow monitoring and ensure respect for human rights of Central Americans, and give "Coherence" to the immigration policy implemented by the federal government.

"These programs speak precisely of an important element in immigration policy of President Calderon: consistency. We respect the United States want to respect the human rights of Mexicans ... that we are calling for our compatriots is we are doing to foreigners who enter the southern border of Mexico, "he says.

regard to the criticism about the physical state of the 47 migratory stations in the country Romero says: "there is overcrowding, there is no lack of food, water shortages, lack of health care."


northern border
Al INM coordinate corresponds Paisano Program, where they currently attend 21 government agencies, and Humane Repatriation Program, which operates in conjunction with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, "which aims to welcome the Mexican nationals who are deported by the Border Patrol.

These programs are referred by the staff as the main actions to protect Mexicans who migrate to the United States.

"The first thing we do is provide (to the nationals repatriated) water, food, shelter and the possibility of making a phone call to his family, then offer them to those who want the program Humane Repatriation ... to which the host can offer temporary shelter and even a contact through the Secretary of Labor for a minimum bonus of course, that when it comes to their place of origin may seek a delegation to see a job " indicated.

Romero announced that "soon" give lawmakers a bill developed by the INM from consultations with civil society organizations, churches, academics and experts from the Institute Advisory Board.

Romero says that the draft law will be delivered on time so that if lawmakers consider it appropriate, be discussed in September, when you start the next regular session.


Copyright © Grupo Reforma Servicio Informativo

CAN BE FOUND IN THIS NOTE:
http://www.reforma.com/enfoque/articulo/1132174/
Publication Date: 22-Jul-2010

Sperm Count 2.3 Million

Double standards and adoption As gay couples with the Constitution (first part)

marriage and adoption by homosexual couples

Under the Constitution (first part)

By: Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega

DeMarzo published 1, 2010 in the Power of Ideas in Central Axis

December 21 Mexico City made history. Do not exaggerate or dramatize. The number of cities or countries where gay people get married they have the fingers. The fact that my city I'm proud to be inclusive. It scares me that some in the name of "morals and good customs" seek to exclude. I am happy that friends who are excluded from society, everyday life and law, from March 4 to express their identity, their decision and their love. The 21 approved an amendment to the Civil Code (art. 146) that allows two people to marry, regardless of sex, gender, right or condition. That same day, PAN deputies wanted to amend one article (art. 391) to prohibit same-sex marriages could take. The reform was not, the article was as it was. Marriages in general, whether gay or heterosexual, may adopt.

By Federal Government, the Church and conservatives who follow them, not like this, thought the City would become the Sodom of the XXI century, the divine punishment perch on legislators and governors to approve such reforms, and homosexuals who practiced contrary to nature, would from now in mortal sin, "sa c Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which in the same manner as those having sexual immorality and gone after vices against nature, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire. "(Jude v. 7)

Well, sort of said representatives of the Church. The federal government eased a bit and tried to translate that terror in secular arguments. A month and a couple of days later, the Attorney General's Office (PGR) surprised us with the presentation to the Supreme Court an action of unconstitutionality against (sic) amendments to the Civil Code of the City then in waterfall organized some governors, yes yes, also of PAN, to bring Constitutional Controversies paths against the reform on the grounds that a breach of its rules.

Between that January 27 and February 23, the Court has been rejected as inadmissible Disputes submitted by the states, because the Constitution is clear: Article 121 provides that acts of civil status held in another entity under valid laws must be taken as valid in all other states and will want to attach to any other entity determines the validity of legal acts to be agreed in Mexico City, is forgetting the Federal pact . Ay! Again, the PAN does not understand very well of the powers of a Federation. More on that below.

February 23 presented representatives of the Federal District Legislative Assembly (ALDF) and the Federal District Government (GDF) to the Supreme Court, in reporting that respond to the constitutional claim presented by the PGR. These two documents that call and IGDF IALDF respectively.

Unconstitutional Action

In Action Unconstitutional (hereinafter AIPGR), the PGR denounced as contrary to the Constitution reform 146 and 391 do not reform, both the Civil Code of the City, considering that violate the third paragraph of Article 1, 4 first, sixth and seventh, 14 second paragraph, 16 first paragraph and 133 of the CPEUM. Based on these articles, in AIPGR discusses two types of questions:

a) Social issues such as marriage, family and adoption by same-sex marriages. These issues are a court of law to give meaning for constitutional norms according to the Attorney violates reform. Democratic constitutions usually contain standards of openness, as the governing "family" precisely to allow this concept be given content by the legislature every time I concretized in an ordinary law. Set in the Constitution a meaning closed, static, tied to organized state under this rule to live by models or opinions of our ancestors. This is sometimes good, it is a limit to political power, but to give practical social concepts as family, marriage and parenthood should be attended to empirical data, research and studies and not personal opinion on what should be family or marriage, let alone what was in the past. This is because otherwise the rules are out of step with reality and thus lose regulation. I think this is obvious and need not dwell on it. On these issues, the PGR alleges violations of articles 1 and 4.

b) legal issues as the alleged violation of the principle of legality and motivation of the reform in question and the alleged violation of the integrity of the Mexican legal system with the entry into force of Civil Code reform. In these legal issues argued by the violations Articles 14, 16 and 133. For an authority to act, there must be a rule that grants this power or competence, that is it gives substance to that act. Under the rule of law applies the principle of legality to the acts of the authorities in the sense that they can only do what the law authorizing them, by contrast, individuals can do whatever the law does not prohibit. The PGR ALDF argues that despite having competition, not state its reasons why it amended the Civil Code. And that is to enable the authority to intervene in the sphere of rights of citizens requires not only having a base (standard), but a reason.

a) Issues of Marriage, Family and Parenting in AIPGR

In general, the PGR's argument is quite regrettable, are not relying on the law and supports scientific truth, but bases the Most of their arguments in moral standards and moral their prejudices. The positions and views of the Solicitor are truly authoritarian and homophobic. Social issues are argued based on his their perception and conceptions of what should be that in no way compatible with a democratic constitution and intended to be equally as Mexico's, much less reality family in Mexico. To support their concepts of family, marriage and parenthood, does not refer to a single study or investigation, no judicial decision, not even a scientific opinion or experience of such authority of the DIF. It merely cites the Family Law of the Italian Civil Cicu Antonio (1879-1962) for, based on this, define their concept of family and argue that the Constitution protects only an ideal model of family, this being formed by a father, mother and children.

The PGR has a concept of family that gets Through an ancient method of interpretation of the Constitution, whose "election" never justified. Based on the Branch called Spiritualists Reviewer Attorney argues that the introduction of protection of the family as constitutional protection in 1974 was based on the ideal family model, totally ignoring the historical context of the reform during the Echeverria, as evidenced in its report on GDF. Still, the cultural transformation that has occurred in Mexico in the last thirty-five to dren can not be ignored and can not claim that the Attorney remains in effect a family concept of a time when the sexual revolution continued to be suppressed, which liberalization of women just beginning, and yet a time when being gay was condemned not only socially, but in some countries like the United States, was a crime. Just in 1973 homosexuality was removed from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders . Attorney also forget that the constitutional narrative introduction to the third paragraph of Article 1 of the Constitution which prohibits discrimination on the basis of preferences (including others), after the reform was the 4th: it was in 2001 during the government of Vicente Fox It follows that, if instead of opting for the spiritualist interpretation, Attorney opted for objective and consistent interpretation and follow Interpetación constitutional principles (unity, functionality, integration, consistency and force of law) perhaps they would arrive at the conclusions of the Federal District. But the preferred PGR torture concepts, authors and rules so that after biting them eyes, say that the marriage is same-sex adoptions by gay couples are unconstitutional.

The narrowest concept of the family of Attorney leaves out the fundamental protection to all families are not composed of a father, mother and children. According to the Attorney a single parent family is not worthy to be constitutionally protected, neither is the widowed father with children, much less one composed by a homosexual couple with biological or adoptive children (yes, if you can) want to ignore or forget which has always homosexual individuals and, since 2006, gay couples in domestic partnership together may adopt. These, according to the Attorney, are not worthy of protection families constitutional. Attorney says it recognizes that there other types of families, but the ideal is the only thing protecting the Constitution and therefore, gay marriage, unable to procreate and raise a family have no place. Yes, in his argument the Attorney denies marital status to married couples who are unwilling or unable to have children, for reasons of age, biological, psychological or physical. These, unable to procreate are not marriage and "the family is created based on marriage has offspring" are not either, family. Go! I am glad that Mr. Chávez Chávez Attorney is not Secretary of Public Education or charge of DIF.

In one passage, the Attorney speaks of "natural principles" The same right impels the constitutional and ordinary legislature to organize and regulate the domestic partnership legally to protect and guarantee their basic structure and determine all those aspects which are not defined by natural principles. (Page 17 AIPGR)

In its reasoning, if the core of the family is marriage, it is clear says, this should be heterosexual because it is the only one who can procreate, thus the Homosexual couples do not have to access an institution they can not participate, and to do so are Coexistence Societies. Attorney then clear from the concept of family, the concept of marriage, which he said should therefore also to protect the Constitution. And is that the Constitution nowhere is talking about heterosexual marriage. Well, even if they want to twist rules at their convenience, even Article 30 paragraph B fraction II speaks of the marriage should be between a man and a woman, and the O is a condition that supports various combinations disjunctive true between the separate elements to this O. And nowhere is that marriage should be between a man and a women, the Attorney must extend his argument to talk about the ideal marriage, but in fact this issue has no place in a constitutional debate in Mexico.

As far as the second sociological concept, parenting or the ability to adopt homosexual marriages, the PGR on a presumption: that a child is adopted by a homosexual couple because one day not the child and placed in a potential disadvantage compared to other children in ideal families, and would therefore be discriminated. Literally says that with the adoption of a marriage homosexual can empower "children adopted n or find more suitable environment and suitable for development, thereby generating the one adopted a position of inequality and discrimination against others adopted by married couples made up of a man and a woman. "(pp. 85, 86 et seq AIPGR)

However, reading the AIPGR not clear why arriving at this conclusion, extra ñamente the Attorney General's Office no evidence. His argument is based on demonstrating that the Mexican government is obliged to ensure the interests of the child, via Article 4 of the Constitution and through international treaties, rules have been further developed and clarified through the interpretation of the Court, whose thesis provides the AIPGR. The AIPGR is a chair on the purpose of adoption and the importance of taking into account the interests of the adopted child, the importance of respecting the rights of or Nas and children and adolescents, but never proves Attorney why you think that living with a gay or lesbian parents may involve or damages, much less why integrate a child to a gay or lesbian parents may involve not take into account the interests of the adoptee and that this is a disadvantage or discrimination.

I think no one has made argument that children come before the desire to adopt an individual or couple (homosexual or heterosexual). The ALDF has started from the idea of \u200b\u200bopening up possibilities for orphaned children that also allow gay marriages to file an application to adopt. Also forget the Attorney two things 1) to adopt must be submitted to the applicant (individual or couple) to a strict screening process, which certainly prevails in the best interests of lower and 2) be adopted by an individual or heterosexual couples is not a guarantee for the child per se.

Starting from the assumption that it would be disadvantageous, discriminatory or harmful to a child live with homosexual parents, only by parental sexual preference, is in itself discriminatory. Attorney forgets that there are many children in families homo, but intends to legally conceal homosexuality.

b) Issues on the principle of legality and integrity of the legal order

On the legal side shows the Attorney confusion in the understanding of the need to justify or warrant the objective reasonableness of the issuance of a standard. Attorney that the legislature intended to justify how he did not enjoy a right necessitates the introduction of a permissive rule. That is, in the case, the Attorney said that the reform to 146 of the Civil Code is unconstitutional because the ALDF " not establish that fundamental right is restricted to people with other orientations or preferences for same-sex pre-reform . Nor does it demonstrate how the normal law of the Federal District before generating reform discrimination, violence, prejudice, exclusion or cancellation of equality. " (page 33 AIPGR)

The PGR confuses the principle of proportionality review in interference with fundamental rights, they say, that the ALDF does not comply with it by allowing same-sex marriage. The test of proportionality or reasonableness that includes a detailed analysis of the legitimacy, constitutionality, necessity, appropriateness and proportion to other property or rights of a reform applies only when it has intervened in a right and not when it is extended as is the case for reform of the Code Civil concretized same article 1 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with the 4 on the equality of men and women before the law to ensure equal tod @ s before the law. Motivate the need for reform in the sense of justifying an invasion of rights measure, is a basic principle of the rule of law. The adoption of proportionality or reasonableness test demonstrates that the measure adopted by the legislature is not authoritative (Übermaßverbot) but even when intervening in areas of constitutionally protected rights, is legitimate, is based on a standard is necessary, appropriate and proportionate the end. In this case it is understandable if the Attorney is reform as arbitrary or if he believes her rights are violated. I do not see how a reform that includes, violates rights, and instead find themselves on the reasoning of Attorney arbitrariness in wanting to limit rights of some people for their preferences without any constitutional basis. In any case must be the PGR who apply the principle of reasonableness of their claim, as we've made repeatedly by the German Constitutional Court in its interpretation of the marriage institution as security protected by the Constitution and which excludes same-sex couples.

In that sense, it is illogical to ask the legislature or, where appropriate, the reviewer branch of the Constitution, to make a test of reasonableness when extending rights to individuals. It would be as absurd as it would have required the Power Reviewer and President Fox to demonstrate why should not discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation (amendment to article 1 of the Constitution in 2001). Still, it seems that the PGR was read or not the preamble or the opinion of the reform commissions to 146 of the Civil Code as in both documents is explained at length why the exclusion of gay couples is discriminatory.

One aspect worth mentioning is that over AIPGR of the Federal Public Ministry, relieved of the burden of proof of negative facts (obviously impossible) to ALDF. He asks that encourages such non-reform of Article 391 (ie, motivation something that did not) and claims it did not establish that adoptions by gay couples does not harm children. Instead, as I said above, the Attorney does not provide hard data only not a single evidence of the existence of injury to children who presumed, but not shown.

Finally, and for what it does to the integrity of the legal order applies to a large extent, the reasoning of the Minister disposing Valls Disputes submitted by states because 1) civil matter is a local matter and therefore the ALDF can define marriage as it sees best and the marriage is not a constitutional institution and the concept of family is open 2) the Constitution resolves the conflict in setting policy Article 121 of civil acts valid under state law, will be in everyone else.

In conclusion I think the AIPGR no legal arguments to be sustainable in a constitutional state that is serious about its Constitution.

The next installment: the arguments of the Federal District. ALDF reports and GDF.

How To Make Guinea Pig Couddle Cup

marriage and adoption by homosexual couples accordance with the Constitution (Part II)

Marriage and adoption by homosexual couples

In accordance with the Constitution (Part II)

By: Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega *

published on 8 March at the Power of Ideas in Central Axis

In my previous note, I spoke to Action Unconstitutional (AIPGR) filed with the Supreme Court (SCJN) by the Attorney General's Office (PGR) against the reform of Article 146 of the Federal District Civil Code allowing marriage between same sex. The same day he approved the reform, tried to amend without success, Article 391 of the same order to prevent gay marriages could take. The Prosecutor considers that there is a normative relation between reform and Article 391 unchanged, and therefore requests a review of the constitutionality of both rules.

According to Article 64 of the Regulatory Law of the fractions I and II of Article 105 of the Constitution (Act which regulates the action of unconstitutionality and the Constitutional Controversies) the legislative body that issued the standard, that the Legislative Assembly of DF (ALDF) and the executive body that issued, ie the Government of the DF (GDF) should report containing the reasons and foundations designed to support the validity of the contested rule or otherwise of the claim of unconstitutionality.

February 23 The two reports were filed in the Supreme Court's:

Report of the Federal District Legislative Assembly

The report is flawless in its structure is very clear. I think it's a must read for anyone interested in the issue of sexual freedom, gender and rights and constitutional law. The document is very well supported with modern literature, scientific studies, decisions of other courts and opinions of professionals. Is divided into three parts:

I. Permissible to the challenge to Section 391 of the Civil Code of the City The ALDF considered irrelevant to review the constitutionality of Article 391 as not being modified on December 21, 2009, the time to check their conformity with the Constitution has expired (this rule is in force since May 2000). The ALDF is estimated that there is no normative relationship between Article 146 and 391, why which has been established that a rule could be revised even if the deadline for review had expired. ALDF argues the absence of a regulatory system between the two articles. It is clear that the ALDF would have to argue the expiration of the term for the revision of this standard. However, there is a theory of jurisprudence of the Court said that to integrate a system must have a direct relationship between them inseparable. ( UNDER LAW AGAINST. TO CHALLENGE LEGAL SYSTEM AS NECESSARY TO CONSTITUTE A TRUE UNIT. 2a. / J. 100/2008. 04/06/2008) In it, could strip the Court the reason for revision.

II. Constitutional basis for the reforms at issue. This is one of the richest parts of the report because it is the presentation of the theoretical framework of discrimination against gay literature with a strong battery.

a) Discrimination. Explains the three ways in which discrimination: law enforcement, and concealment of pathologizing homosexuality. The repression is primarily concerned with the criminalization of preferences with imprisonment. In Mexico, pursued in the early twentieth century by way of "attacks on morality and decency." Pathologizing is refers to its classification as a disease or psychological disorder, which consequently leads to stigmatization. The declassification of homosexuality as a disease began in 1973, the WHO did in 1990. It makes clear that homosexuality is a sexual behavior. The cover is defined as a consequence of stigma and homophobia, as these prejudices are brought to standard. Homosexuality presents a false narrative in popular and legal and that creates discrimination. Later contest the main prejudices against homosexuals, "which can not form stable relationships," "are not good parents" or that "spill over to children." The ALDF believes that the claim of attorney with the AIPGR is homophobic, authoritarian and seeks to cover up the homosexuality legally denying them the right to marry and form families, before it puts forward a strong argument: " The PGR claims that the Court declare that homo families and gay couples are prohibited by the Constitution or at least that the Constitution does not value or protect them, including the Constitution seeks their marginalization in the interests of aclanzar the ideal family model. The attempt to marginalize homosexuality is the way that homophobia aims to move when it has not been deleted. "

b) Right to Equality. It is argued that reform is inclusive. Do not allow same-sex couples to marry, and therefore excludes discrimination and this is contrary to the Constitution.

c) Freedom of expression. Here I think it has one of the strongest arguments of the ALDF for gay marriage. It is argued that marriage is a form of expression. E l reasoning is that if it is acknowledged by the Court to have the right to self determination and from there, the right to identity and from this follows the right to sexual identity, marriage appears as a symbolic act, performative, as a form of expression allows me to express my sexual identity and also the legitimate in the public domain. The assumption is that gay people not only want to marry so involved (rights and obligations) but for what it means socially (legitimacy). " Marriage is expressive conduct. This extension is important because of its link with the values \u200b\u200bof the free development of personality, diversity and equity ... [And] given the importance that society attributes to marriage and its consequences in our culture, to deny gay couples are denied their right to self-definition. To recognize marriage between same sex, the state validates their legitimate senders and their message. Therefore not be extended to same-sex couples, limited their freedom of expression. "

III. Response to the concepts of invalidity raised by the PGR. The ALDF refutes the arguments presented in the AIPGR for violation of various articles of the Constitution:

a) Article 16 and the drive for reform. The ALDF argued that the reform does not intervene, transgresses, limited rights, on the contrary, expands, and therefore which is not necessary to justify the reasonableness of the reform. The ALDF disputes the idea that the PGR should have demonstrated why the fact that same-sex couples could marry was discriminatory and therefore why it was necessary to reform the Civil Code. Shows that the concept of marriage and family filed in AIPGR is wrong, because "l characterization to make marriage and family is exclusionary, discriminatory and places the state above the people. Reproductive ability is not necessary or sufficient condition to form a marriage or family, or partner or marriage is necessary, nor sufficient to raise a family. " In sum, says the ALDF, the extension of rights is constitutional and does not require proof of their necessity. With regard to Article 391, if there was no change, how is that intended by the prosecutor that the ALDF "generate arguments for not changing a rule that was changed?"

b) Article 4 and the concept of family. The ALDF rejects the concept of family with the AIPGR arguing that it is based on dubious constitutional interpretation. The PGR's approach to reform violates the concept of family is protected by Article 4 is unfounded, says the ALDF, as the Attorney offers an interpretation of this unsubstantiated. The ALDF blemish this interpretation of authoritarian and based on ignorance of the characteristics of Mexican society. "The concept of family in the Constitution and therefore marriage must conform to the prohibition of discrimination, so the Civil Code reform, the FD is valid."

c) Articles 1 and 4 and adoption. Demonstrates the falsity of the allegation that the Attorney General the possibility of gay couples to adopt, would represent an affront to the rights of boys and girls or So says the ALDF, part of presumptions. The ALDF believes that the arguments AIPGR in attempting to impose a family and are based on prejudice, and that does not make a single test of this. "The Attorney is to place the highest court in a false debate because he never specified what the conflict of laws." The ALDF explained that Article 391 (and 390) are the mechanism designed to ensure the suitability of candidates to act adoption, being hetero rules (ie, by their own force does not cause injury to occur until the first application of the law) will be case by case decision where the interests of the child by judges and administrative authorities. "The best interests the child must be weighed case by case basis and no budget through identification with an ideal model of family, otherwise it would no longer consider precisely the interests of each child. "The ALDF justifies the Civil Code reform as a concretization of the third paragraph of Article 1 of the Constitution, that is seeking to achieve equality of all before law, and explains that if there had been differential treatment in respect of adoptions, yes it would have been unconstitutional. The ALDF concludes "By express constitutional mandate is not admissible to presume" prejudice "on the suitability of a person to be a parent based on their sexual preference ... Until proven otherwise, neither the legislature nor the right applicator can boast a lower fitness gay couples to care for a child. "

d) Legal certainty. The penultimate concept of constitutional violation is referred to the principle of certainty. In the AIPGR is argued that the entry into force of the reform will cause a state of legal uncertainty constitute a conflict of laws between the contested rules and other legal provisions of acts of civil status. The ALDF reject this argument ñalando constitutional Article 121 which states expressly that legal acts an entity should be recognized in others. It also explains the ALDF, there are theses of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence establishing that violate rules while others, the actions of each entity will be completely valid, since they are based on valid laws, and that those laws are valid, the legislature must be competent to issue them. The ALDF demonstrates the competence to legislate in civil matters (art. 122).

e) Article 133 and drive the legal system. The latter concept refers to disputed the interpretation of Article 133, which establishes the hierarchy of sources in the legal system Mexican. The PGR believes that by altering the composition of the marriage and allow gay marriages to take the ordinary legislature overrides the Power Reviewer, it deviates from the family model that Attorney believes that the Constitution imposes. The problem is that unconstitutional the PGR wields depends on the acceptance that there is a family model imposed by the Constitution, so that, according to AIPGR, any deviation is an affectation to art. 4 CPEUM, which is false, as demonstrated in the Report of the ALDF. The Mexican Constitution does not have any closed concept of family, leaves him open to interpretation. A democratic state should make use of interpretation dynamics of the Constitution, it allows the inclusion, pluralism and tolerance, thus only a Constitution than the passage of time.

Report Federal District Government.

The Report of the Head of the Federal District IALDF complements, is a longer document that is based on two basic themes: family and marriage.

1. The IGDF presents information to rebut fully supported the concept of "ideal family" and marriage argued in AIPGR. The report presents statistical and scientific data on the integration of families in Mexico. shows that the concept is not unique within the different rules in the states of the Republic and that the concept of family has had a dynamic transformation especially in the last three decades, since 1975 to date, is when you have given the biggest changes in the family in Mexico and the world. The variety of family homes and the diversity of establishing personal relationships within them is an alternation very different from traditional family forms, as estimated by the GDF to the assessment of the PGR on marriage and family models are incorrect. The IGDF argues that "the previous consistency [of the patriarchal family], derived from the lack of freedom could soothe the consciences of right-thinking but not for a moment assumed an ethical level than the current family relations chaired by the freedom and tolerance ... [For] As in the dictatorial regimes, authoritarian families are also looking to be more quiet. " Therefore, GDF said, speaking of contemporary family is talking about the twenty-first century family, not existed when the process began institutionally revaluation of women (1974). "Reforming the Article 146 of the Civil Code for the Federal District to establish the right to marriage between persons of the same sex is a matter of civil rights and equal citizenship. "He explained that e No reason that the family is central in life of societies, it is transformed, too, when those companies are unchanged. According to the National Survey of Family and Vulnerability, 2007, prepared by the National System for Integral Family Development and the SSA: the number of households increased rapidly, although with a membership shrinking and increasingly constituted by parent households, blended families and sole proprietorships. This is because the raison d'être of the modern family is not mere survival or protection of its members, but the pursuit of personal fulfillment and happiness. Therefore, the estimated GDF l to reform is conceived as an action against discrimination and the recognition that families formed from the union of two persons of the same sex, enjoy the same rights as those families consisting heterosexual couples. "It is a reform that recognizes a right to those who were denied to him before formalizing exclusive situations and serves to integrate different realities to the statistically most frequent. Represents a step forward in our social and democratic growth even if it involves a change in historical traditions, precisely because some of those traditions are what exclude or deny rights. Recognition of the right to marry for same sex is legal or social nature, which aims ensure the full exercise of the rights and obligations governing the relationship and coexistence between people of same sex with the same requirements and effects as pre-existing marriages between people of different sexes. "

The IGDF explains the context of the reform of article 4 of the Constitution, and in 1974 is that while you might think the "ideal family" was the traditional family, the fact is that the idea of \u200b\u200bplacing a constitutional level the protection of the family sat in the family policy (CONAPO, Family Planning), Government of Luis Echeverría had a more liberal court which the attorney seeks to read the preamble to the reform. GDF makes clear that the Constitution is a living document that must be construed in accordance with the times so that it does not lose its regulations. In this way, in a long argument shows that it is false that there is only one type of family and it is true that the Constitution protects only an ideal type of family, leading to discriminate or leave unprotected all that are different from the one formed by a father, mother and children. Explain why it is true that the Constitution talks about that marriage should be between a man and a woman and it is false that only through heterosexual marriage to form a family that is not true that only through marriage and family form a it is false that the purpose of marriage is procreation.

GDF clear that no international instrument defining the concept of family, let alone marriage, but it obliges signatory states to not affect the principle of nondiscrimination. concludes that constitutionally There is no foundation to support a family can only be established through marriage between heterosexuals.

2. With regard to the concepts of strictly legal violation, the GDF argues in the same direction as the ALDF so no point in repeating the arguments here. rejects the violation of the principle of legality in section 3 of the document and rejects the arguments of violation of the principle of legal certainty and to Article 133 in Section 5. should be added that to show that they are trying to a social relationship that claim to be legally regulated, and GDF l l argues that to the exclusion of homosexuals from marriage is an element of stigma, inequality and restriction of rights against a population group. "Reforms for the recognition of marriage between same-sex couples legal rights to social sector so far excluded. Therefore, is sufficient justification to redefine marriage, that upsets the other legal institutions derived from it and contrary to what the Attorney said in the legislative process is credited adequacy the implicit prohibition to same-sex couples to marry, implied rape the fundamental right of non-discrimination on grounds of preferences. "He concluded:" if the legislation was challenged as a reason to carry generator full practice the principle of nondiscrimination, the reform does not exist due to no protection of rights under the union between same sex, but that people who favored such unions were being denied access to the specific figure of marriage, because domestic partnership is a different shape designed for other purposes, for what both can co-exist for individuals to choose: marriage is designed to share life as a couple where both are reserved for sexually the other; the domestic partnership is designed to protect relationships of familiarity and solidarity.

3. In a fourth point, the GDF rebate AIPGR's arguments against the possibility of adoption by same-sex marriages. GDF refutes the presumption of AIPGR that the mere fact that a homosexual couple adopts a child will cause injury, and does so by presenting results and data from various studies homopartentales families in several countries. In all concluded that there is no harm to children and youth and on the contrary, studies often yield results positive training and personal development of children raised by homosexual couples. "The large majority opinion is that there is no scientific study that shows some disadvantage in the child's psychological development .. Boys and girls from families homo no different from those raised with heterosexual parents. The belief [that causes harm to the child] is intended to support the need for both figures for boys and girls can buy their sexual role, but studies show that society tends to reduce the traditional dichotomy of male / female and reality is that of father and mother as a rule is limited. The division of male / female is also undergoing transformations. "

The GDF concludes that no single empirical study that shows some disadvantages in the development of the children of homosexual couples. The way the State to better ensure the child's best interests will be reviewed case by case basis the adequacy of the couples who make an adoption application, it must pass the strict scrutiny of the authorities and that is what guarantees the welfare of the child and the prohibitions and prejudices. And, says GDF, "is as has been done so far, first the interests of the child and in all cases a judge will ultimately determine. Not ensure the child's interest through general rules that exclude people. For all the foregoing, the fears surrounding the promoter in relation to the issue of adoption by same-sex couples is unfounded. "

My Conclusion:

married is a right. Marriage can not be exclusive to heterosexual couples because it has the purpose of procreation, but a host of other reasons that spouses decide: the company and affection, mutual interest and also, procreation and the establishment of an "ideal family." That one is the right to self determination. That's what freedom is all about. Marriage is a performative act is an expression, and thus is related to the exercise of various freedoms, including that of expressing identity. Imply the possibility freedoms exercised or not, without hindrance, while not hurting others. Then wonder what's wrong with a couple of women or married men?

On the other hand, any type of family, traditional or modern, nuclear, extended or recomposed, heterosexual or homosexual is guaranteed a priori, a good upbringing. What is required is that the parental figures rather exercise their duties of care and education. It is the task of the state and families, especially parents and schools, to participate in including everyone and take responsibility for eliminating discrimination that people could be gay and young members gay or lesbian parents. If we really want to ensure the best interests of children, we must teach them to respect differences and not discriminate or permit discrimination against anyone. Children are not born prejudiced, they are taught by adults.

With regard to the decision to take Court is important to note that before the constitutional court is not a winner and a loser, as well as decided by the Constitutional Court, does-what to do, on behalf of the Constitution. The Court, as part of the political process, also directed and influenced by him, and she in turn, will influence, for the purpose of the Constitution is the political community (Peter Häberle). The Court did not rule in favor of the City or on behalf of the Attorney General ruled in favor of the Constitution.

Data:

The First National Survey Exclusion, Tolerance and Violence in Public Schools, SEP 2008, 52.8% said they hate to share classes with non-heterosexuals.

The National Institute of Statistics and Geography, in 1990 75% of Mexican families were traditional (father, mother and children) for 2000 were 69%, and in 2005 had decreased to 68%. In contrast, single-person households have increased since 1990 although they were not counted in 2000 represented 6.3% of households in 2005 made the leap to 7.5%.

National Council Details de Población (Conapo) del año 2009 muestran que poco más del 52% de las familias son de tipo nuclear o tradicional, es decir, conformadas por papá, mamá e hijos; 9% de ellas son de tipo monoparentales, e decir, conformados por hijos y uno de los padres.

(Datos de El Universal 07/02/2010)

Entre 2007 y 2010 s celebraron 753 Sociedades de Convivencia, de las que 418 fueron parejas de hombres, 297 de mujeres y 38 de hombre y mujer. El 4 de marzo entró en vigor la reforma al 146, 19 parejas homosexuales presentaron su solicitud marriage to the Civil Registry.

* Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega is constitutional and essayist. She is the author of the blog Gera's Place. Has been devoted primarily to issues related to fundamental rights and the theory of the constitution. She has taught at the National Institute of Criminal Sciences at the Universidad Anahuac del Sur, Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Mexico and Universidad Autónoma Benito Juárez. Currently done postgraduate studies in Germany. Twitter: @ geraldinasplace

Period One Week Late Low Hard Cervix

Elections in the German Constitutional Court

Elections in the German Constitutional Court

By: Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega

Published on March 15 in the Power of Ideas in Central Axis

The Federal Constitutional Court or Bundesverfassungsgericht (Germany) has a new member to fill the vacancy left by its current President, Hans-Jürgen Papier, whose term ended this March. The selection process of constitutional judges has raised once again, criticism and praise from academics and experts. From April the Court will judge the president and the youngest in its history.

The BVerfG, abbreviated in German as the long name of the Court, is composed of 16 judges divided into two senates with 8 judges in each and six cameras, 3 by Senate with 3 judges each, and have different skills (there are judges who belong to two cameras). The first Senate was engaged to review or habeas corpus and the second Senate Verfassungsbeschwerde reviews all resources related to organizational matters of state, namely, controversies, abstract review of rules, prohibition of political parties and electoral issues, basically.

According to data in the late nineties, received about 5.000 BVerfG REURSA of protection or Verfassungsbeschwerde each year. For 2006, the Court had already exceeded 6,000 annually. 90% of them are not admitted, and 10% of those admitted, only between 1 and 2% is successful. An interesting fact is that although the action is "free", its abuse is punishable by fines rather high which can be up to € 2,600. The penalty was introduced in 1962 and has been used 2.719 times. The total amount obtained by abuse of the writ of amparo is € 479.761. The percentage of fines for abuse respect of all appeals is 0.26%

Originally (1951) each senate was composed of 12 judges, ie judges BVerfG was 24, but thanks to a reform of 1963 reduced these numbers and this was politically motivated:

In 1952 he appeared before the BVerfG the first dispute against the government of Konrad Adenauer, as the Court got in the way of German rearmament and the establishment of military corporations. The first Court after the enactment of the Basic Law in 1949 and the Basic Law in September 1951, held its first meeting the historic September 28, 1951. For the appointment of its judges the ruling party (CDU) took care not equitable integration in both senates, for he thought that the Senate would be the second strong, dedicated to the constitutional and unconstitutional actions, because under their perspective, problem of constitutional interpretation would be more in the distribution of powers between the federation and the states. In this way, the first Senate was left to the opposition party, the SPD. However, the transition from the early years, the CDU realized that the first Senate, dedicated to reviewing issues of fundamental rights, was actually which has become more important, especially on the issue of rearmament. With the first decisions of the Constitutional Adenauer suffered several setbacks, as the reforms to the reinstatement of the army caused a serious clash between the Government and the Opposition. It called on both senates to provide an opinion on the subject. The first Senate had 7 judges appointed by the SPD and the CDU 5, responded to the arguments of the Opposition (SPD). While the second group and 8 appointed by the CDU and the SPD 4, retaliated against the Government's arguments (CDU). The plenary session also presented a study in which they opposed the government, but only on issues formales y no en la cuestión de fondo. Esta resolución del Tribunal causó zozobra en el Gobierno y en la misma Academia, pues se tenía la sensación de que el Tribunal estaba oponiéndose al camino democrático ¡El “temido” gobierno de los jueces! El Gobierno gozaba de mayoría en el Pleno del Tribunal y se sintó defraudado, pero ésto significó en realidad un triunfo para la autonomía judicial, indispensable para garantizar la autoridad de sus decisiones.

Hoy todavía se dice que tal o cual juez es de tal o cual partido, pero la realidad es que el hecho de que se ubique a los jueces por los partidos que los nominan, no implica there is some link between them. The judges are independent and often resolved against the party that nominated them. Judges are linked directly to the Constitution and nothing else. Still, as in the United States, each party has preferences for certain people for his career, whether judicial or academic, they demonstrate a certain political affiliation or leanings on certain controversial issues. Constitutional judges from half court and the other races, academia or the offices. Half are elected by the Bundestag (lower house) the other by the Bundesrat (upper house representation or federal). Your order lasts 12 years without possibility reelection.

elections were held in 1953 and Konrad Adenauer won easily, he dedicated his second term in part to fight the court and try to change the majority within it, seems to understand the Constitution as a political assembly of judges or something similar. In 1961 Adenauer was reelected for a third time, and before leaving office in 1963, finally managed to reduce the presence of judges nominated by the opposition through a reform that would reduce the number of judges to 8 by the Senate, or 16 in total. Since then, the CDU was in both senates, a 5:3 majority. In the Senate called red, the first Senate dropped 4 places in the SPD, being 5:3 for the CDU and the Senate called black, the second, attempted to negotiate a 4:4 tie, what went wrong at the time of voting, being equal to 5:3 ratio the CDU. Black and red colors relate to the colors used by the two major German parties, the Christian Democrats (CDU) and Social Democrats (SPD), respectively.

-secret negotiations "between parties to nominate judges, were released by the negotiator of the SPD, Adolf Arndt, in his article" Shadows of Karlsruhe (Karlsruhe über Schatten). Arndt has in his note that before the election of judges, the parties negotiated both the Bundestag and the Bundesrat, and this is because the nominations must be approved by a majority of two thirds.

The crisis between 1953 and 1963 served to strengthen institutional autonomy of the Court, as before the reform, the judges were assigned to the Ministry of Justice, which lacked financial and administrative autonomy. After the Minister of Justice made statements against the decision of the Court on rearmament, judges began to lobby their independence from any constitutional body, same after many obstacles, obtained. The new status of the Federal Constitutional Court meant financial independence, higher wages and a constitutional body. Oh sure! also scarlet robes with white jabot, which were a quirk of the constitutional judges to differentiate from other judges who have black robes. The red robes were made following the Florentine magistrates model used in the XV and XVI century.

The election of constitutional judges is not an open process, as would be expected in a constitutional democracy such as Germany, in reality it is a negotiation between parties, depending on the judge who leaves and the formation of government, and have clear contributions to cover. The new judge who joins the Court in Karlsruhe was nominated by the junior partner in the coalition that currently governs Angela Merkel, the Liberal Party (FDP) and that 2010 out two other judges of the second senate, a post that will surely occupy the SPD CDU and another, by respecting the allocation of places available.

The media just speculate what will happen? Who will? The election is closed by a Committee in the Bundestag or the Bundesrat, depending on the judge comes out. The president of the Bundestag Committee on Justice, Wolfgang Neskovic of the Left Party (Die Linke) was already annoyed at the lack of news, as there were nominated and the term is approaching. On 25 February, it was announced that the international faculty of the University of Göttingen, Andreas Paulus, the FDP would be the candidate to fill the vacancy on the Court. Negotiation took a week to accept the new President of the Court but has always followed the tradition that the Vice President of this post. Surely the delay was due to the negotiation of the next Vice.

On Thursday 4 March, it was announced that the Vice President and member of second senate Vosskuhler Andreas (by SPD) will be the new President of the Court, that Judge Ferdinand Kirchhof (the CDU), the first Senate, will be new Vice-President, and that the Professor Andreas Paulus was already chosen by the committee as the new constitutional court to join the first Senate. Vosskuhler (born 1963) became the President of the Court's youngest and first postwar generation, which implies a generational change, important data in Germany. Paulus (born 1968) is by far the youngest judge who has held a seat on the Court of Karlsruhe. To Vosskuhler "the German Basic Law is a case of good fortune in the country's history "and said that" the Germans must recognize that along with the Supreme Court of the United States, the Bundesverfassungsgericht is one of the most recognized constitutional courts in the world, "has served as an example for others. "

Papier Judge of the Court is dismissed as" rights hero. " Repeatedly demonstrated through your decisions liberal vision, "the state is to protect freedom." During his tenure, Judge Papier (the CDU) paradigmatic cases resolved in German doctrine, such as the Law Aviation Safety (Luftsicherheitsgesetz), the case of secret surveillance (Große Lauschangriff), the Company Law of Coexistence (Lebenspartnerschaftsgesetz) or case which recognizes interpret the law to computer security (IT Grundrechte) or recently the case of pensions for the unemployed (Hartz IV). On Tuesday, the judge announced Papier, for the last time on behalf of the German people, "a protector of rights important decision declaring unconstitutional a law that regulates the storage of data.

Paulus's appointments and the new President and Vice revived criticism have always done the procedure, which is that nominated 16 judges are half and half by each House, but according to the Organic Law of the Court, the 12 members of the Justice Commission of the Bundestag are those who choose to form a majority representative of 2 / 3 to the judge. In the Bundesrat vote the full whole and requires a majority of 2 / 3. Many legislators and scholars have advocated a change this procedure in which all members can vote and who is also in both chambers, a procedure such groups, interviews or appearances, so that society can take a picture of them . Prefer to approach the model.

On the other hand, others argue the German procedure, they say: if it works, and the proof is that "98% were excellent judges" - what judges will be in that 2%? do not know -. is said that the legislators of the Commission are entitled to vote, and that the quality of their vote is decisive. It is about quality over judges voters quantity. "In just over 50 years of life of the Court, not bad judges were sent to Karlsruhe, copy the procedure of the United States would be that we focus only on the person and not their abilities, which Many judges would cause discomfort, but excellent defense of the constitutionality, they were not elected. "

What procedure for electing judges is better? I believe that in any case requires a method that is in fact respected, and not as in Mexico, it is assumed that the ministers are nominated by triads and open public procedures, but in reality it is pre-candidates negotiated behind the scenes by political parties. In theory, the method is closer to the Mexican United States, but in reality is like in Germany, the problem is that we get to that 98% of infalibilidad, del que los alemanes presumen.

Household Items That Work Good As Lube

The city of Emden and its characters

La ciudad de Emden y sus personajes

Por: Geraldina González de la Vega

publicada el 22 de marzo en el Poder de las Ideas en Eje Central

Estuve en el Mar del Norte, en la ciudad de Emden, parte de la región de Frisia del Este. Ostfriesland, en alemán, es una región en el noroeste del estado de Niedersachsen. Ostfriesland se encuentra en la costa del mar del norte y se compone de las ciudades de Aurich, Leer y Wittmund, and the free city of Emden, in addition Frisian island of Borkum, Lutje Horn, Memmert, Juist, Norderney, Baltrum, Langeoog and Spiekeroog. Ostfriesland is a region very different from the traditional German. They're not feeling in Germany, but somewhere between the Netherlands and maybe at some English port. They speak a dialect that sounds between English, Dutch and German. Stratospheric amounts are taken tea, according to the man who sold us 500 grs of black tea and 500 grams of different teas, they are the number one consumer of tea, followed by the Irish, not English as is commonly believed.

The free city of Emden is located in the Bay of Dollart, if one sailed straight from the coast, would Niederlande or the Netherlands. The city of Emden is very old, its founding dates back to 800. In the XIV and XV had many conflicts with the powerful Hanseatic League states, as Emden Ostfriesland and other cities, as Marienhafe, supported the pirate Klaus Störtebeker. Who incidentally, where the daughter of an important character Marienhafe. Thanks to these conflicts, Emden was occupied by the forces Hanseatic Hamburg until 1447 mainly those Emden finally stopped.

The Störtebecker is a legend in Ostfriesland, the story that once arrested him and his troops, Störtebecker asked the authorities Hamburg once beheaded him, let him run, "clear, head along a line formed by his men and to spare the life of the people he managed to pass before dropping dead. Thus, the Störtebecker, saved all his men, after death, -, or half dead? Long after his death became also a figure of political advertising. The "Left" made him a hero of the medieval class struggle against capitalists Hanseatic states. Those in the "right" made him a sort of Francis Drake German. "It's like Che Guevara, a freedom fighter but also as a Robin Hood, because he fought for the rich on behalf of the poor ..." say some residents of Stralsund.
A figure that citizens do not pay much attention Emden-or rather no, is the medieval jurist Johannes Althusius. Althusius's fame is based in federalism, whose principles were opposed to the centralization proposed by Bodin - what happens when the world clings to the wrong ideas! -. His theory was based on the doctrine of the symbiotic association of the community, ie, based on a pluralist principle, recognized the autonomy of a community of men living together and joined by real links with a union contract, express or implied, institutionalized. Beginning with the family, federalism Althusian, was "rising" level up to the association of states, dividing sovereignty between them, - not centralized, as proposed by Bodin - so that its base would be the law, not may be imposed by a sovereign and foreordained by a deity, but by a set of secular and humane laws in terms of effective participation of community members and in successive layers. Althusius based his theories on religion Calvinist and Swiss and Dutch models. This theory and legal philosophy earned him the prestige to be called to fill the position of trustee for 34 years in Emden.

The city of Emden in 1526 became one of the first in Germany to embrace the Reformed faith. Since John Laski had been invited to Emden in 1542 by the Countess Anna to reorganize the religious life, Emden had become the "Geneva of the North." Its strategic location on the border between the German Empire and the Netherlands gave him freedom of movement vis a vis the Lord Lutheran and the Catholic Emperor. At the same time its strong Calvinist spirit allowed him to make an exceptional influence in key areas of the Netherlands and Germany. Emden was nominated as the alma mater of the Dutch Reformed Church, as was from Emden where many Dutch ministers came and went in Emden, where many exiles from persecution of the Duke of Alva found refuge. At the Synod of Emden in 1571, the Reformed Churches of the East Frisian and Lower Rhine joined the Dutch churches to form the largest union of Calvinism in the North. Emden was a major port, with close communication with England and served as a refuge for a large number of English nobles during the reaction Catholic Mary Tudor.

Emden was strong provincial conflicts with his Lord, as well as powerful and much larger units of both the German Empire and the Kingdom of Spain. Therefore, the City Council was constantly in search of a skilled leader who would guide the negotiations and the fate of the city. Altin Johann, the son of a shepherd named important Menso Alting, a student of law at Herborn, where Althusius was his teacher. Alting apparently sent his father back "Politics" of Althusius. Its reception - very friendly - gave the Emdenianos the idea of \u200b\u200bsending calling Althusius, who agreed in 1604. To see "Politics" of Althusius see here.

The city's wealth during the early seventeenth century allowed the construction of a main dam to dam the river Ems, the dam was maintained until 1616. Also built the Wall of Emden, which protected the port of troops of the Thirty Years War. In 1574, Rathaus was built or City Hall, Sea Gate until 1635 and the New Reformed Church in 1643. During the time of Althusius, Emden, was a free city, but only de facto, but not of law, it relied on the Netherlands as protecting power.

In the photos, the New Church tower, the facade of the New Church, La Puerta de Mar and Rathaus.

in Emden is now a huge port that handles about 6.75 million of Tolen (2008). The products are mostly automotive, wood products and further equipment for wind mills. The port of Emden is the third in Europe in management of Auto, after Bremerhaven and Zeebrugge. Emden is a Volkswagen factory, which produces the Passat. In much of the city are brick houses, much like Dutch and German architecture which is called brick expressionism (Backsteinexpresionismus) which is a special variant of expressionist architecture that emerged during the twenties of last century in Germany. The most influential regional points of this architecture was the great cities of northern Germany and the industrial area of \u200b\u200bRhein-Westfalen. Amsterdam School was an important part of this movement whose style also found in the Netherlands and Belgium.

As port is Emden's food is coming from the sea as well as tea (Ostfriesischer Tee), the Matjes or herring are the symbol of the region. A weekend of May is Matjes Festival, which begins with the fishing season. The herring prepared in thousand varieties are delicious! Typical of the region, too, are the fish sandwiches and as in the British island, the fish & fries. During our stay was May Sollo season, a typical flat bottom fish, white meat, soft and delicious.

As the images from the beaches of the early twentieth century, where you could see people dressed with great elegance stroll along the sand, they dress, hat and umbrella and the most daring, in a kind of dress that was supposed to be a bathing suit No, them in full signer ba striped suit and conservatives stick. L a beach full of booths and chairs replaced blue and white stripes. "I could see? Nordeney for that is, one of the 7 Islands Ostfriesland and we could visit. To get there, we first had to take a train to the coast of Norddeich, from there a ferry to the island. The island reminded me of an amusement park in the United States, houses, shops and hotels, all in harmony. A truly beautiful, the houses overlooking the beach a dream not. The coastal landscape is very different from that Mexicans are used to, but it is a spectacle of nature. We bought a couple of "backpacks" and enjoy the sea and the beach for a couple of hours before returning to the dock to take the ferry back to mainland Europe and then travel back home.