Funde Y Motive La Causa Legal Del Procedimiento

results from the literal and teleological interpretation of article 107, sections III, IV, V and VII, of the General Constitution of the Republic, that the principle of finality applies only to the parties involved in the proceedings or proceedings that gave rise to the act complained of, and in no case to third parties outside the Republic, since this constitutional requirement does not impose any restriction on the promotion of amparo with regard to them. In this regard, in view of the fact that a secondary law cannot go beyond the constitutional requirement that governs, it is undeniable that the provisions of the last paragraph of section XV of article 73 of the Amparo Act, which are in force on the fifteenth day of January in the year one thousand nine hundred and eighty-eight, must not be regarded as a restriction imposed on the third party outside the procedure, whose contested act is apparent from recourse to the judgment on safeguards, but as an additional exception to the principle of finality for the parties to those proceedings; Thus, if an authority other than the judicial, administrative or labour courts is invoked, the third party is in no case obliged, outside the proceedings concerned, to exhaust beforehand the remedies or defences on the basis of which the act which he considers unconstitutional may be amended, revoked or annulled. We now know that harassment is an act adopted by authority – whether administrative, legislative or judicial – and that affects the governed temporarily, not permanently. This law must respect certain clauses to be legal and constitutional, because if it did not do so, it would be null and void and would have no legal effect. In accordance with the above, one of the principles that must be observed above all in the issuance of a norm is that of legality, which governs the actions of authority, which is one of the fundamental foundations of the rule of law, whose modern origins can be found in the thought of the philosophers and jurists of the Enlightenment. for whom the law was the expression of the general will, reason and sovereignty, so that acts of authority had to be subject to it. In order to avoid the adoption of manifestly unconstitutional administrative acts, it is therefore proposed that sovereignty reform Article 38(II) of the Federal Tax Code so that it provides for the obligation for the administrative authority to clarify the basis of its competence according to the subject, grade or territory. Since, in its version, that provision favours the adoption of acts which, in the absence of such data, place individuals in a state of legal uncertainty since, if formulated solely with these requirements, they are unlawful, as the Supreme Court of the Nation has already held in its finding that administrative acts must comply with the guarantee of legality provided for in article 16 of the Constitution, They must contain, in particular, the legal basis on which the power to adopt them is based in accordance with its competence. Consequently, the guarantees of legality and legal certainty contained in articles 14 and 16 of the General Constitution of the Republic may require that any act of authority, whether harassment or withdrawal, be committed by the person expressly authorized to do so, indicating in the act itself that it is an essential formality giving it legal effect. the device(s) legitimising the competence of the issuing person and the nature with which he acts, either alone, by the absence of the head of the unit concerned or by delegation of powers. No one may be disturbed in his person, family, home, papers or property, except on the basis of a written order of the competent authority justifying and justifying the legal reason for the proceedings. In judicial proceedings and proceedings conducted in the form of a hearing at which the hearing is normally held, it shall be sufficient that they be recorded in such a way as to ensure their content and compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. It is therefore important that, as soon as a harassment activity is reported, it is thoroughly analysed by the expert in order to have absolute certainty that it is legal and, if not, to be able to request the corresponding declaration of nullity.

Today, nuisances are emitted by various authorities that are part of the Mexican State; this procedure must comply with the above requirements, which are specified in our Magna Carta as well as in the laws applicable to each case; Otherwise, they would simply be declared null and void. « Article 16. No one may be disturbed in his person, family, home, papers or property, except on the basis of a written order of the competent authority establishing and justifying the legal basis of the proceedings. « COMPETENCE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES.