Monday, May 16, 2011


AZMEX POLICY 15 MAY 2011 Computer english Important read

National Security Act, reform
Javier Corral Jurado | 00:54

The board of the Commission of Government in the House of
Representatives agreed last Friday, unanimously, a work plan to
refocus the discussion and possible adoption of amendments to the
National Security Act. It is very important legislation for the
future of the federal strategy to combat organized crime, and should
arouse the interest of society and the government of Chihuahua, an
entity in which federal forces have deployed a significant presence
to assistance and aid to public security tasks. The issue also
significantly through the system of human rights.
Homeland Security seeks to preserve the state to maintain and
preserve the freedoms and rights and full respect for the security
and integrity of its inhabitants.
Given the magnitude and importance of this issue, it is clear that
the legal framework of National Security is an issue of prime
importance, as it seeks to safeguard the integrity of the state,
institutions and individuals.
In Mexico, the dimension of national security policy was understood
as a matter of political control of the regime shift. From 1917 to
2000, operated a kind of hybrid between internal and patrimonial
protection of the political class.
The primary objective of this approach was to maintain political and
social control in all spheres of public life without disturbing the
established regime, based on the ruling party and the centralization
of the facts of the three branches of government in the executive
branch .
With a change in the Presidency of the Republic, the government of
Vicente Fox worked to change the approach that was national security,
setting concepts and attributes in a law containing the arbitrariness
and abuse.
On April 5, 2004 was published a constitutional amendment that
empowers the Congress "to enact laws on national security,
establishing the requirements and limits on investigations." However,
it was not until January 2005 that was published in the Official
Journal of the Federation of National Security Law.
This law defined in Article III to National Security as "the actions
immediately and directly to maintain the integrity, stability and
permanence of the Mexican state, which lead to:
I. The protection of the Mexican nation from threats and risks that
confront our country; II. The preservation of national sovereignty
and independence and territorial defense; III. The maintenance of
constitutional order and the strengthening of democratic institutions
of government; IV. Maintaining the unity of the parties within the
federation referred to in Article 43 of the Constitution of the
United Mexican States, V. The legitimate defense of the State in
other states or subjects of international law, and VI. The
preservation of democracy, economic development based on social and
political development and its inhabitants. "
With this law of 2005 was achieved through legal regulation, define
the concept of Homeland Security, which had goals for future
occasions not act politically against the company, under the
justification of national security. You can set criteria for
intelligence activities of the state and ordered the integration of
the National Security Council.
It is important to note that national security is not the same as
public safety. The first focuses only on activities that jeopardize
the stability of the state, while the second, according to the
General Law of National Public Security System, "includes special and
general prevention of crime, the investigation to make it effective
The sanction of administrative violations, the investigation and
prosecution of crimes and social reintegration of the individual ... "
Public safety is the responsibility of law enforcement and
prosecution, among others.
However, both the police and the local prosecutors have proven
ineffective in fact a practice, have been overtaken and overrun by
organized crime and have been deeply infiltrated by criminal groups
who have taken, especially at the municipal police in deployment
logistics structures for the execution of their criminal plans.
Therefore several states, including Chihuahua, have turned to the
Federation for both the permanent armed forces and the Federal
Police, to take the fight directly to organized crime, but sometimes
those same authorities who asked for help, deal with throw all sorts
of allegations and questions against the federal government when it
has actually been in support of the local society to the failure of
the authorities.
Therefore, the April 23, 2009, President Calderon sent the Senate an
initiative to reform various provisions of the National Security Act
that would give legal certainty and fix the responsibility of
different levels of government in the extra performance and a
subsidiary of the Army to deal with a difficult goal but undeniably
necessary: ​​front and resolutely combat drug trafficking.
Drug trafficking is an evil that has destroyed societies, either by
violence or because it generates makes it easier for children, youth
and adults use substances that alter their physiology and psyche,
disrupting their lives and their environment.
What does the president? While putting in place a strategy to combat
drug trafficking, heard evidence that many police structures were
infiltrated by criminals.
That is why the President had to rely on support, until now very
valuable, the Mexican Army. However, this action by the Army in
combating organized crime has no legal framework. Thus it was that
Calderón proposed creating the legal form called "Declaration of
Existence of an Impact on Internal Security" to frame the
participation of armed forces in coordination with other security
The declaration would come when they have acts which endanger peace
order or a municipality, state or region or when the company was in
grave danger. The declaration should be substantiated by the National
Council of National Security and never involve the suspension of
individual guarantees.
After just over a year of discussions, the Senate approved amendments
to the National Security Act, improving the president's initiative.
It is important that citizens know that both the Senate as the
president's initiative, are based on jurisprudence of the Supreme
Court's Office, Ninth day argument 38/2000, which states:
The Supreme Court has said that "the armed forces may come to the aid
of civil authorities when they seek the support of force they have.
For this reason, the armed institute is constitutionally empowered to
act on public security in support of the authorities and the
participation in the National Public Security Council of the holders
of the Ministry of National Defense and the Navy (...). Furthermore,
Section VI of Article 89 of the Constitution empowers the President
to dispose of these forces for internal security. For these reasons
it is not necessary to declare the suspension of individual
guarantees provided for extreme constitutional Article 29 ... "
This established a procedure for determining when, how and where you
could count on the permanent armed forces in relief activities to
local authorities through a "declaration of involvement in internal
security." The Senate to approve the president's initiative in
greater proportion, stated that the declaration of assignment to the
internal security would not be indefinite and not suspend the
fundamental rights of individuals. He also had good care to establish
that the declaration would never by social movements or electoral or
political conflicts, and crimes that members of the armed forces
committed in aid of civil authorities would be tried by civilian courts.
The Senate achieved a good balance between the objectives of national
security and human rights system.
Arriving at the House of Representatives this bill, the board turned
over to the five committees, including the Governance Commission
which I chair. In fact so vast that turn showed that did not want to
dictate what the senators received. I checked on 8 September when put
to the vote of the members of the board of the Committee on Interior
to list the item for the legislative process and open discussion and
analysis. The PRI refused to address the issue. That decision was
reiterated on 23 February.
A few weeks ago, there was an unusual interest and determine a theme:
a group of PRI deputies, mainly from the State of Mexico, produced a
"draft opinion" on the National Security Act. They wanted to quickly
get the reform in full. This attitude contrasted with the drowsiness
prontona they observed to move forward with other reforms, or the
boycott of reforms such as labor, politics, transparency or public-
private partnerships.
That project eliminated several of the successes that the Senate had
placed in the minutes and empowered the army to play a variety of
police activities. This opinion has lost the balance that the Senate
had made between the legal effect to the actions of the armed forces
in cooperation with civil authorities, and the fundamental rights of
the population.
The company was quick to claim the points from this opinion of the
alternate group violated individual rights, including changes made by
the PRI group and were most criticized by the society are: Driving in
the law too many military terms as "adverse factor "," obstacle ",
pressure, pressure" dominant. "
Article 30 empowers the army to conduct intelligence work. In 70 he
was empowered to intervene private communications. Article 75,
Section VIII, annulling the clause had placed the Senate in which it
was determined that the declaration of internal involvement would not
proceed on motion or social conflicts, political or electoral. In
Article 86 empowered the permanent armed forces for activities
related to the police, when there was a statement of involvement in
internal security. Among the permitted activities were: arrest of
individuals, execution of interrogations, conduct of intelligence
operations, conducting undercover operations, raids and surveillance
Coincident with the claims citizens, at the time I spoke strongly to
reject the possibility that the Commission of Government, declined
dictate these reforms. Now I am accused, in a national campaign of
disinformation-sponsored by the PRI-to "have blocked legislation that
would have given the people better tools to fight crime."
It was necessary to rule the minutes of a transparent and including
all sectors of the population concerned and to all government
institutions involved.
Would never agree on the approach that the PRI deputies gave the
bill, unlike the human rights system. Neither agreed to bypass the
legislative process.
Since social protest and that as president of the Commission of
Government decline to reject the bill analysis, alternate work group
changed some of the most controversial of his pre-draft opinion, but
still very worrying proposal. This document will only be taken as a
reference in the discussion, the document that will dictate the Senate.
The wording of the definitions in the field of Homeland Security
should be required to not give rise to arbitrary acts, must assess
the basic question, the relevance of the armed forces involvement in
police activities.
I hope that some of these approaches are resolved in the new process
of discussion and analysis that we have open. On Friday 13 May, the
Board of the Government Commission approved the final work plan to
dictate the reforms to the National Security Act.
This was done taking the times that the rules and regulations of the
Chamber of Deputies. July 27 is the deadline for the joint committees
of the Interior, Defence and Human Rights, delivered the document to
the Board of the Chamber of Deputies.
Because the Commission of Government is the first in the order to
which he turned over the minutes from the Senate, is responsible for
developing and adopting the opinion, then send it to the other two
commissions to discuss and also approval.
The objective of the Commission of Government is working together
with the other two committees to a document that has the greatest
The first action will be held this May 16, when he issued the
invitation to receive the views of specialists, academics, civil
society organizations, government ministers and heads of departments
related to national security, public safety and human rights. They
will be invited within a period ranging from 17 to 25 May, to
participate, first by sending their views in the same period, then
participate in a series of public consultations which are scheduled
for 7 and 15 July, and then to a national forum to be held on July 21.
The plan calls for making a national forum for analysis, "Democracy,
National Security and Human Rights", it is intended that all
stakeholders, NGOs, experts, institutions, give their opinions and
proposals to help with the opinion.
With the information gathered parliamentary groups analyzed,
evaluated and developed the draft opinion, which will be presented on
June 5 for members of the joint committees, which meet in the week
ranging from 12 to 14 June to discuss and approval and submitted to
the Board.
You can find all documents related to the topic in the microsite of
the Commission of Government:
Of course the decision is all the information transparent, open
process citizens and timely account of actions and meetings to
celebrate. My bet is always against the diatribe and slander.

No comments:

Post a Comment