Amparo: the “representatives of the people” vs. the people

Imagine that in a soccer match, the first half is governed by one set of rules and the second by another, and to top it all off, the referee in charge of interpreting and applying the rules was appointed by the owner of one of the teams.

That's more or less what happened with the Amparo Law and the issue of retroactivity.

Performing legal tricks, Morena and its followers approved reforms to the Amparo Law that limit (despite claims to the contrary) this fundamental right of citizens to combat the excesses and illegalities committed by those in power.

What the deputies approved in the early hours of the morning, and what the senators approved within minutes, was that the procedural stages of the appeal for protection filed under the law remain as they are.

But for the next stages, the new rules will apply, the ones President Claudia Sheinbaum wanted and her majority gave her.

For example, if a citizen filed an amparo claim a month ago and the judge granted it provisionally pending a hearing to determine whether the amparo is final, the provisional amparo remains in effect.

If, as expected and given the ruling party's haste, this reform is published tomorrow in the Official Gazette of the Federation, the hearing to determine whether the requested injunction is granted definitively will be governed by the ruling party's congressmen's approval yesterday.

What's the problem?

The new rules severely restrict the granting of an injunction, whether individual or collective, requiring the plaintiff to demonstrate that the government's decision actually harms them.

Furthermore, under the new rules, the judge will have to assess whether granting protection to the plaintiff (individual or collective) does not affect the social interest.

Social interest can be translated as the government's interest, as Morena's senators and deputies clearly stated that these modifications are to "prevent a few" from halting projects "that benefit the people," as was the case with the succession of injunctions against the destruction of the Mayan jungle for the construction of an inoperable train.

Likewise, the Morena supporters' justification for approving the reforms was to prevent "powerful individuals" from using legal protections to extend tax resolutions.

Quoting the Macuspana classic, who used biblical passages at his convenience, we must remind the Morena supporters of the mandate to "do not do good things that seem bad, nor bad things that seem good."

In the end, the only ones who will be harmed by these reforms will be the citizens.

All.

****

Now it turns out, according to the much-troubled and criticized governor of Tabasco, Javier May, that the scandal involving landowner Ramiro López Obrador, "Pepín," is a "campaign by the right, by conservatives" and not just another case of unexplained enrichment by his Secretary of State.

These statements, repeated like Hail Mary by Morena supporters whenever they are exposed, are nothing new.

As you know, López Obrador's brother is making headlines after filing his asset declaration to claim ownership of 13 ranches in various parts of Tabasco, eight of which were purchased during his brother's tenure at the National Palace.

But the governor prefers to look the other way because he already has enough problems with having "outed" Adán Augusto López with the issue of the La Barredora cartel .

Don't let them pull your ears from La Chingada again.

@adriantrejo