What Is Amparo Legal

There are two types of amparo: amparo direct (amparo directo [also called amparo uniinstancial]) and amparo indirect (amparo indirecto [also called amparo biinstancial]) (Mexico, August 2005, 200; Zamora, 2004, 266 and 267; Almanza Vega, 1994, 89, 90 and 109). The differences between the two relate to procedure and jurisdiction (Mexico, August 2005, 200; Zamora, 2004, p. 266). The competent authority for direct amparo is the Colegiado de Circuito (Mexico, 10 January 1936, art. 158; Zamora, 2004, p. 267; Almanza Vega, 1994, p. 109; see also Mexico 5 February 1917, 107.V) and, exceptionally, the Supreme Court (Suprema Corte de Justicia) (Mexico 5 February 1917, 107.V.d). In indirect amparo applications, the Collegiate Circuit Court and the Supreme Court of Justice may intervene in proceedings heard by a lower court, such as a district court (juzgado de distrito) (Mexico, 5. February 1917, 107.VI; Zamora 2004, 266; Almanza Vega, 1994, p. 90; see also Mexico, 10 January 1936, art. 114).

– Diáz Solimine, Omar Luis. 2003. Juicio de amparo. Buenos Aires: Hammurabi. On 25 August 2007, Reynato Puno (Faculty of Law, Silliman University of Dumaguete) explained the legal concept of Amparo`s twin, the Philippine complementary data on habeas. In October 2007, Puno declared the legal birth of these two mandatory injunctions as its legacy to the Filipino nation. Puno recognized the invalidity of habeas corpus under Article 102 of the Judicial Code, as government officials repeatedly failed to present the body to the alibi defense after simply presenting it. – Rodríguez-Cerna Rosada, Carlos Rafael. 2005. El amparo guatemalteco y las verdaderas reformas que clama su justicia constitucional. Guatemala: Editorial Orión. -Ecuador.

2004. Prontuario de resoluciones del Tribunal Constitucional. 2, Acción de amparo. Quito: Corporación de Estudios y Publicaciones. In a telephone interview with the Research Directorate, a lawyer who had been a judge in amparo cases in Mexico City stated that in the event of secret detention (incomunicado), the detainee`s family would use amparo as an interested party (lawyer 7 December 2007; see also Mexico City, 10 Jan. 1936, 5.III). Lawyers in Haiti who are close to the Collective of Haitian Progressive Jurists and who learn from the Filipino experience should prepare proposals for the government to implement an amparo ordinance as a safeguard against frequent abductions, arbitrary arrests, and torture. – Quiroga Lavié, Humberto. 1998.

El amparo colectivo. Buenos Aires: Rubinzal-Culzoni Editores. Amparo and habeas are privileges introduced in the Philippines to supplement the ineffectiveness of habeas corpus (Article 102 of the Revised Regulations). Amparo means protection, while habeas data is access to information. Both trials sought to highlight the many extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances that have occurred in the Philippines since 1999. [14] In Chile, the term recurso de amparo («remedy of amparo») refers to what is known as habeas corpus in comparative law. The Chilean equivalent of amparo is recurso de protección («protective agent»). An example of direct amparo is an example of direct amparo (Zamora 2004, 267), unless a provisional or procedural decision is contested (ed.s., sect. II.B.3). By invoking the right to the truth, habeas data will not only compel military and government officials to disclose information about desaparecidos, but will also require access to military and police records. Reynato Punos Amparo (Protection in Spanish) will prevent military officers in judicial proceedings from giving negative responses to requests for enforced disappearance or extrajudicial executions that were legally permitted in habeas corpus proceedings. [17] 1.

Amparo against arbitrary detention (amparo habeas corpus) (Zamora 2004, 267; Brewer-Carãas, October 2007, p. 13). In any amparo procedure, it is necessary not only to delimit the fundamental rights violated, but also to determine the harmful act, which is subject to constitutional review. This control can also be divided into 3 types: 1. Wide control. In the case of Argentina, it includes any act or omission of public authority (understood as a public official in the exercise of a public function, legislative or judicial power) or any particular position of power. In Peru, amparo proceedings are also directed against the act or omission of authorities, officials or persons who violate fundamental rights. prima facie not contrary to rules of law or judicial decisions resulting from normal procedure; however, it takes measures against judicial acts (final decisions) provided that the content of the rights is directly protected by the Constitution. In this case, it is similar in Venezuela, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama, except that in these countries, the application for amparo against decisions of the Supreme Court is expressly excluded. It also acts against government acts (including discretionary powers such as pardon or declaration of a state of emergency by the executive), parliamentary laws and private actions (including asymmetric links between work, health, consumers, etc.).

Similarly, the acción de tutela in Colombia takes measures against any act or omission of an authority (administrative, judicial) or private persons (exercising a public function when the complainant is in a position of subordination, against social media, if the conduct of the individual seriously and directly affects the collective interest) 2. Interim control. In Mexico, any voluntary and conscious event, both negative and positive, developed by a State organ (decision or execution); whether against unconstitutional laws, judicial decisions and administrative acts and decisions. However, individuals cannot protect themselves against the actions of other individuals. 3. Limited Control. In Brazil, the Mandto de segurança does not apply to individual acts, judicial decisions, laws, draft laws or administrative acts with suspensive effect. – Caffarena of Jiles, Elena. 1957. El recurso de amparo frente a los regímenes de emergencia. The amparo ends with constitutional and legal norms and leaves to the judge the formalistic work of their application. However, amparo is also understood as a means of realizing these laws through legal reasoning, which can establish procedural rules, through procedural autonomy that the judge creatively develops.

LEY DE AMPARO, Article 1. 3. Each State Party undertakes: (a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms recognized in this document have been violated has an effective remedy, even if the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity; (b) Ensure that any person who exercises such a remedy is established by the competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities or by any other competent authority provided for in the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; (c) ensure that the competent authorities apply those corrective measures when they are granted. In criminal matters, the High Authority of the Court (superior del tribunal) which allegedly violated the law is also competent (Mexico, 10 January 1936, art. 37). This helps to expedite amparo prosecutions related to criminal proceedings (Baker 1971, 91). – Chiriboga Z., Galo A. 2001. The data of Amparo and habeas action: guarantees of constitutional rights and their new legal reality.