The notice system in the Amparo trial in Mexico is essential to guarantee the right to a hearing and due process. The Amparo trial is a judicial process used to protect human rights and individual freedoms against acts of authority that may violate them. To achieve this, the Amparo trial establishes a procedure that includes several steps and deadlines that must be notified to the parties involved in the process.
Article 26 of the Amparo Law establishes that notifications in the Amparo trial can be served personally, by official communication, by the list published in court rooms, and electronically. The notice of resolutions is an essential requirement to guarantee the defense rights of the parties. Therefore, if a person is not correctly notified of a resolution, they may request the nullity of the corresponding procedural act.
The use of electronic notifications in the Amparo trial in Mexico is a reality that has come to improve the efficiency and security of the justice system. Electronic notifications allow documents to be sent and received more quickly and efficiently, eliminating waiting times and delivery delays that can negatively affect the development of the judicial process.
The use of electronic notices in the Amparo trial is regulated by the Amparo Law, which establishes the requirements and conditions that electronic notifications must meet to be considered valid. According to this law, electronic notifications must be sent through secure electronic means, such as email or the messaging system of the electronic platform of the Federal Judiciary Power.
In addition, the Amparo Law establishes that the parties involved in the process must give their express authority to receive electronic notices, and these must be supported by a security system that guarantees the authenticity, integrity, and confidentiality of the information sent. Likewise, deadlines are established for the delivery of electronic notifications, which must be the same as those established for notifications by traditional means.
The implementation of electronic notifications in the Amparo trial has numerous advantages, including cost and time reduction, decreased human errors, and the elimination of the need for paper and physical document storage. Also, the use of electronic notifications improves access to justice by allowing the involved parties to receive and send information from anywhere and at any time.
However, the implementation of electronic notifications in the Amparo trial requires updating the rules and training the system operators. Additionally, it is important to ensure that electronic notifications comply with the same deadlines and requirements as traditional notifications to ensure that all parties involved in the judicial process have the same opportunities and procedural guarantees.
Finally, the efficacy and efficiency with that electronic notifications arise can be challenged. As a result of their increasingly frequent use, various questions have arisen. One of these questions concerns the uncertainty that, on some occasions, arises regarding the computation of procedural terms. This questioning arises because the parties express their consent to electronic notifications of judicial proceedings, especially when using the federal judiciary’s electronic system.
This questioning is relevant when considering the following jurisprudential criterion whose title states literally: “ELECTRONIC NOTIFICATIONS IN THE AMPARO TRIAL. THEY ARE AN INDEPENDENT AND AUTONOMOUS MEANS, THEREFORE, ALL NOTIFICATIONS, EVEN IF PERSONAL OR BY LIST, MUST BE CARRIED OUT BY THIS MEANS.”
In this precedent, the courts established that electronic notification is an independent and autonomous form of notification, as it is not included in the limitation established in Article 26, Section III of the Amparo Law, and therefore, all notifications in an Amparo trial must be made through this means, when requested by the parties and they have an electronic signature. Considering that the legislator established specific rules for electronic notification that also requires interested parties to have an electronic signature (FIREL), and choose this means of communication that enables the parties’ right to transition towards a digital justice system, those who choose this official means of communication are subject to the rules of such a system, without implying different treatment for parties who did not choose to use it, as they have the right and possibility to distance themselves from the ordinary procedure and opt to transition towards the digital justice system.
Thus, from this precedent, it arises that people who opt for digital notification systems must adhere to this official means of communication, and therefore judicial terms will be considered from the moment electronic notifications are made, although it is not entirely clear.
In conclusion, the use of electronic notifications in the amparo trial in Mexico is a necessary measure to improve the efficiency and security of the justice system. The implementation of this system requires updating the rules and training operators of the system, as well as the trust of the parties involved in the process. However, the use of electronic notifications represents an important advancement in modernizing justice and protecting human rights and individual freedoms in the country.