By: Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega
Last week he spoke of three initiatives that are working in the Senate with important content. Moreover, it passed a far-reaching constitutional reform in Congress and at the same time, there was a lot in the City Legislative Assembly Here:
initiatives in the Senate:
1) Policy Reform DF Senator Maria de los Angeles Moreno presented an initiative for political reform to the Federal District. It proposes to transform the status of the capital in a Great Hall is divided into 16 departments, instead of delegations. The reform at first glance sounds interesting, however, is quite timid in that it does not give full autonomy Federal District, although it says in the preamble. In reality, the reform does not recognize the authority of the Mayor (now head of government) to appoint its chief of police or his Attorney General, which condemns the capital to remain under the Federal Executive. Nor does it allow the Federal Constitution is given so that the conformation of the powers of Mexico City or "Federal City of the Union" would not be sovereign. Competence to issue the Statute of Government moves to the City Assembly, but it can not be equivalent to a Constitution since it contains a chapter of Rights, nor is the product of the political autonomy of the City, as many of the powers of the three powers were defined in advance by the Branch Auditor General of the Constitution.
What the bill proposes is that the City is governed by Article 122 which sets out in detail the powers of local authorities, a basic law of general local government of the Federal District issued by the Congress and a statute issued by the Government of the Federal District Legislative Assembly
The question is what about the citizens of the Federal District? Sen. Moreno respond that the initiative provides a "system of local representation to articulate both their participation colony-level or equivalent area, dividing the territorial departments. "Perfecto. That it will Chilangos can be satisfied.
The initiative is not to be thrown away clear, for example is to recover the definition of what public property of the Federation in the Federal City will be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Powers of the Union or the new distribution of powers between the City and the Federation to reverse the current system where local authorities have powers expressly assigned.
The idea that delegations departments to become, not municipalities, as stated in another initiative also presented by the PRI, also seems salvageable. And is that the City is a system, there are delegations that are purely neighborhood (Benito Juarez) and delegations that have only prisons (Iztapalapa) or trash (Tláhuac), therefore making it a complicated problem in municipalities and delegations as own initiative includes "if you start to except the municipal system is then up to an institution that is not the municipality. Accordingly, this initiative proposes the strengthening of the bodies total known today as "delegations" but under the premise of meeting the uniqueness of the Federal District. "
I also find interesting the idea of \u200b\u200ba Justice of the Federal Court of dedicated, among other things, to resolve jurisdictional disputes between branches and levels of government within the City.
2) reform that strengthens Human Rights. In the news we learn that in the Committee on Constitutional Matters Senate by Senator Pedro Joaquin Coldwell , adopted the opinion on a constitutional amendment that provides for Articles 1, 29, 97 and 102 and that would be to extend the recognition and guarantee of our rights, to provide certainty and limits on our rights if the declaration of a state of emergency and extend the jurisdiction of the NHRC to protect our rights. It is said that the reform of Article 1 would in the sense of recognizing the validity and direct vinculatoriedad recognized human rights by means of international treaties, this statement confirmed by Article 133 which states that international treaties are part of domestic law but are hardly used by the authorities in Mexico. This could mean an amendment to the recent decision of the Supreme Court which denied the possibility to review the consistency of laws against human rights treaties. The actual text of our Constitution has meant that the authorities would be linked directly to all the rights that we are recognized by means of the Treaties. Considering that Mexico has about 100 human rights treaties signed, we can get an idea of \u200b\u200bthe extent to which our rights are expanded. Besides, the reform of Article 1 puts Mexico at the international level, as part of the System for the Protection of Rights, could not remain outside the process of interdependence and unity of human rights exists not only in our continent , but the world.
The reform of Article 29 has been told that is in the sense of providing clear limits and the power to declare certain rights suspended in an emergency or disaster. The existing Article 29 does not define what rights can be suspended, leaving that option open to the discretion of the Executive. The reform of textual guarantee certain rights like life, physical integrity, non-discrimination can not be suspended even in the worst natural catastrophe or war. Also be established that the decrees issued by the Executive on the basis of the powers would be granted the declaration of emergency rule may be subject to review by the Supreme Court. This course would ensure strict adherence to the principle of legality and respect for human rights.
Finally, the reform shifts the investigatory powers of grave violations of human rights by the Supreme Court of Justice to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). This represents a strengthening of the jurisdiction of the NHRC to defend our rights, because although the Court has done little to exercise the option, the reality is that it was of little use in the hands of the judicial authority, because it has no effect binding and this undermines the authority of the Court. To move it to the NHRC, significantly expanding its field of competence, because until now it has the primary jurisdiction (section 102B) to issue recommendations to the authorities that violate rights. The strength of the NHRC does not rest on its ability to punish, but to be the ñalar an authority responsible for the violation of rights before the public and the media. research faculty would provide an opportunity for the NHRC to act ex officio (yes it is looking as it is now Article 97) or upon request (it would be desirable include a number of citizens, in addition to the Executive, Legislative and State governments). The power transferred to the NHRC does not have binding effect, but is said to be complemented by the appearance before the Congress of authority ñalada when it does not accept the results of research the National Human Rights Commission to explain why you do not agree with our representatives. Question would have been highly desirable in the case of ABC Child Care Research or the latest refusal by the PGR to accept the recommendation of the NHRC in the case of the three indigenous wrongly convicted to prison.
In short this initiative is just beginning to see the light and you have a long way to go to be embodied in the Constitution, represents a major change in the understanding of rights in our country. It is also to be welcomed it is one of the first reforms to achieve consensus within the framework of state reform, because although the rights issue is not enrolled in it, could not overlooked in a review in the Constitution. Bravo!
3) limit to the military. Throughout the day we learned that he coordinators you PRI, Manlio Fabio Beltrones, and the PRD, Carlos Navarrete Ruiz, in the Senate, working on an initiative that would aim limit the presence of the military in public security tasks and define the authority of the Executive to make use of the military. This would be done through the amendment to the Homeland Security Act to limit l a military presence on the streets for public security tasks, same would be viable only in precise geographical areas, for a fixed period and only when it is fully demonstrated that civilian authorities have been overwhelmed by crime. For this, political parties seek to establish the figure of "Declaration of the Existence of an Impact on Internal Security" as the standard opening to regulate the activities of the army in areas pertaining to public safety and in accordance with Constitution, relate to civil authorities. To do this we need the reform to Article 89 of the powers of the Executive. Specifically, section VI, who today prescribe the right book p national security, in terms of the respective law, and have all of the permanent armed forces or the Army, Navy and Air Force for internal security and external defense of the Federation. The Declaration would be made by the Executive and would require approval by the Senate and would aim to be the constitutional mechanism to monitor the use of armed forces. This would result in an orderly balance of powers and protection of our rights. In addition, senators working to propose a strategy for troop withdrawal, which is desirable, because according to the strategists of war, in every operation is essential to define a timetable and, above all, what would victory. Calderón's government has neither defined.
initiatives in the House of Representatives:
On Thursday, the House approved one of the most significant constitutional reforms of the recognition of collective action. Last December, the Senate had unanimously approved the amendment to article 17. March 25, the deputies did, too, unanimously, although about 200 members not were present, apparently ahead of the Easter holidays.
To join the text of the Constitution, the reform of Article 17 shall be approved by at least 17 local legislatures. The paragraph reads as follows: " The Congress issued the laws governing collective action. Such laws shall determine the application materials, judicial proceedings and damage repair mechanisms. Federal judges know exclusively about these procedures and mechanisms. " Through the collective actions of individuals can defend our rights and consumer interests through collective lawsuits. Without them, individuals can not face legal proceedings against legal persons usually with enormous economic and political power , Telmex eg Nursery or IMSS. This generates impunity and left defenseless to consumers who we have to take the services but are expensive and / or ill, as commonly no one can individually take the risks and costs of a lawsuit against them.
addition to its importance because it is the recognition of a right, reform is important because it was driven by citizens. It was not a party idea political idea of \u200b\u200bcitizens was organized under the sun worked for recognition of this right under the Constitution. In particular was Daniel Gershenson decisively who worked every day for legislators sometimes interested, sometimes lazy, approved the reform.
far my applause to federal lawmakers.
Initiatives in the Federal District Legislative Assembly:
While the Chamber of Deputies discussed in the full adoption of collective action, Deputy Fidel Suárez Leonardo Vivanco PRI presented in the rostrum of the ALDF an initiative to deny rights to women, the LGBT community, the couples who want to divorce and people who want a dignified death. Yes, as you read. Deputy Suarez Vivanco read somewhere on conscientious objection as a legal right to refuse to obey a rule that violates religious beliefs or ethical. And he thought "! Course, that we can do to discriminate against the LGBT community!" So he got down to work and drafted an initiative that would in any law school would be the example of a student who did not understand what is right human.
The initiative seeks to legalize the refusal of officials! the City to terminate a pregnancy, to marry a gay couple, to give a child up for adoption to a gay couple to perform the matching procedure sex, marriage divorce without grounds, to respect the law of advance. I must say, all of the above are human rights. The Deputy Suarez logic was: the official need not meet the standard if you do not agree with it because it contradicts their morals, although this involves a violation of human rights. No, it does not matter, because the consciousness of the staff (which is authority for) will be quiet to discriminate or violate a right to an individual. What he attended law school this member? (Yes, asústense, Vivanco Suárez holds a law degree).
The fact that this an initiative like this is to annoy anyone, because it is a group of representatives who are looking for ways to deny a right. It is worrying willing to legalize the refusal of a public service in order to satisfy their consciences, while today it is divorce, abortion, sex matching, euthanasia or orthotanasia, marriage or adoption, this rule could be interpreted morning to deny any other type of services to people by skin color, gender, race, religion, etc., contrary to Article 1 of the Constitution.
An authority can not, ever, deny a right based on discrimination. An authority, never, can use their personal convictions to apply or stop applying the law. The basic principle governing the rule of law is the principle of legality. The authority can only do what the law allows, to do what the law requires it and obviously can not do what is forbidden. The State's power stems from the Constitution and the law, and therefore their existence depends on it.
If the State recognizes that there is reason to disregard the law as an exception, is just a way of turning any unlawful purpose does not fall into the subjective perceptions of justice, or because the outcome in this particular case was not desired, or because we do not want this political outcome; because they want to harm a political adversary or contribute to the friend. The rule of law, to work, must be tied to the idea of \u200b\u200blegal certainty, whether like or not like the result to have been attached to the law.
Will the day that we take not only the rights but the rule of law seriously?
An embarrassing fact:
According to the World Economic Forum, the rule of law in Mexico place is in the 111 (of 134 countries).
0 comments:
Post a Comment