THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM OF MANDATORY PRECEDENTS AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR NON-COMPLIANCE BY FEDERAL JUDGES.

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7346909

Abstract

At present, we are facing a diverse form of integration of Mexican jurisprudence, this, as a result of the implementation of the Eleventh Epoch of the Judicial Weekly of the Federation, therefore, this article aims to address whether or not there is responsibility on the part of Federal Judges as a social claim for not complying with the determinations issued by their hierarchical superiors in confrontation with judicial independence.

Now, the judicial reform that concerns us, was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on the eleventh of March of two thousand and twenty-one, and from the first of May following, began the Eleventh Epoch of the Judicial Weekly of the Federation, in which, the way of constituting a precedent that is mandatory following the system of hierarchies for a certain territory is restructured, or, where appropriate, the entire country, which is why it is considered to constitute a transcendent change, in order to move to the system of jurisprudence by reiteration of criteria to precedents, which refers to the US system.

Historically, the function of jurisprudence has laid the foundations for the conduct of judicial bodies, that is, they are guiding criteria that resolve certain circumstances, which although they have already been discussed in advance of the case that is resolved or that in a similar way may constitute an idea of the way in which the new case should be adjudicated; However, in a generic way, at least five previous cases had to be specified so that the theses issued reached the rank of jurisprudence and therefore, their obligatory nature was constrained, which could occur in a short or indeterminate period of time.

According to Minister President Arturo Zaldívar, it constitutes the most important constitutional reform of the last quarter of a century, specifically with respect to the jurisprudential system, since it implies a structural change and that seeks significant effectiveness to urge self-criticism, in what interests it states:

"Modification to the system of jurisprudence, to strengthen the precedents of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. In order that the constitutional doctrine that frames the work of the rest of the jurisdictional bodies of the country."

That assertion is supported by the fact that the case-law was limited to the creation of theses by contradiction or by repetition; The reform proposes that the Supreme Court, when analyzing an issue and the vote is qualified, be understood to have generated a mandatory precedent, which is why the population can demand its observance immediately and the criteria be used by anyone who goes to trial without the need to join five criteria in that regard, which makes its creation more flexible and therefore its application.

For this reason, it is understood that a criterion that becomes mandatory comes into force once it is published in the Judicial Weekly of the Federation.

References

DECRETO por el que se declara reformadas y adicionadas diversas disposiciones de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, relativos al Poder Judicial de la Federación. Disponible en https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/ref/dof/CPEUM_ref_246_11mar21.pdf, (visitada en junio de dos mil veintidós.

Zaldívar, Arturo, “Undécima Época” Milenio, 13 de abril de 2021, disponible en https://www.milenio.com/opinion/arturo-zaldivar/los-derechos-hoy/undecima-epoca, (consultado en junio 2022).

Poder Judicial de la Federación, Reforma judicial con y para el Poder Judicial, México, 12 de febrero de 2020, p. 3 y 4.

Ley de Amparo disponible en https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LAmp.pdf, (Consultado en junio de 2022).

Arnel Medina-Cuenca, Ernesto Salcedo-Ortega, Omar Huertas-Díaz. Debido proceso e independencia judicial en América Latina. Mayo 2017.

Pág. 37. https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/download/1950/2063/ (Consultado en junio de 2022).

Carta Democrática Interamericana https://www.oas.org/charter/docs_es/resolucion1_es.htm (Consultado en junio de 2022)

Comisión Internacional de Juristas. Principios internacionales sobre la independencia y la responsabilidad de los jueces, abogados y fiscales https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/International-Principles-on-the-Independence-and-Accountability-of-Judges-Lawyers-and-

Procecutors-No.1-Practitioners-Guide-2009-Spa.pdf (Consultado en junio de 2022).

Principios básicos relativos a la independencia de la judicatura, adoptados por el Séptimo Congreso de las Naciones Unidas sobre Prevención del Delito y Tratamiento del Delincuente, celebrado en Milán del 26 de agosto al 6 de septiembre de 1985.

https://www.ohchr.org/es/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/basic-principles-independence-judiciary#:~:text=El%20principio%20de%20la%20independencia,los%20derechos%20de%20las%20partes, (Consultado en junio de 2022).

Recomendación del Consejo de Europa sobre la Independencia, Eficiencia y Función de los Jueces https://rm.coe.int/1680747c9c (Consultado en junio de 2022).

Código de Ética del Poder Judicial de la Federación https://www.scjn.gob.mx/sites/default/files/material_didactico/2016-11/codigo-de-etica.pdf (Consultado en junio de 2022).

Innovación Jurídica. José Ramón Cossío Díaz, Tirant le Blanch México 2018.

En su caso, las autoridades investigadoras mantendrán con carácter de confidencial la identidad de las personas que denuncien las presuntas infracciones. Recuperado junio 2022, (https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGRA.pdf )

Criterios Orientadores del Consejo de la Judicatura Federal, Recuperado junio 2022, (https://www.cjf.gob.mx/apps/criteriossed/allCriteria?ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder_RadGrid1ChangePage=1)

Criterio orientador 2 del Consejo de la Judicatura Federal. Recuperado junio 2022, (https://www.cjf.gob.mx/apps/criteriossed/PDFCriterioNum?NumeroCriterio=2)

Criterio orientador 120 del Consejo de la Judicatura Federal. Recuperado junio 2022, (https://www.cjf.gob.mx/apps/criteriossed/PDFCriterio?NumeroCriterio=120&SearchWords=JURISPRUDENCIA)

Downloads

Published

2022-11-22

How to Cite

PAYAN, B. M. . (2022). THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM OF MANDATORY PRECEDENTS AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR NON-COMPLIANCE BY FEDERAL JUDGES. Uluslararası Sosyoloji Ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 5(1), 30–34. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7346909