Result Of The Accusatory System In Mexico

Result of the accusatory system in Mexico

On June 18, 2008, Mexico passed through one of the most important and ambitious normative and institutional transformations;The constitutional reform in criminal justice, a significant innovation, in which an accusatory criminal system is adopted and implemented, this criminal system is characterized by being accusatory, adversarial and oral.

This new criminal system constitutes a great change within the justice system in the country, and, in which it is governed under the principles of advertising, contradiction, concentration, continuity I have immediacy;principles that guarantee respect for the fundamental rights of the parties involved (victim and accused).

The main objective of this constitutional reform is to provide a prompt, expedited and free justice safeguarding the human rights of the parties involved in a criminal process, whether victim or accused, exercising justice for both parties.

That is why it is important to monitor and evaluate the accusatory criminal system to observe its functionality and acceptance within the social environment and in the same way to detect system deficiencies and correct them for better operation.

It should be noted that in 2013, the Development Research Center to.C. (CIDAC, now Mexico evaluates) Development of the methodology and monitoring for the evaluation of the implementation and operation of the new accusatory criminal system in our country. Based and use of this methodology, the study and analysis of the justice system in each federative entity has been carried out, which the main objective is to observe the progress, quality, development and acceptance since its implementation of the criminal reform.

The evaluation methodology is based on international instruments that have been adapted to the specific case of the Criminal Justice System in Mexico, taking into account all the institutions that make it up as the Judiciary, the Attorney General’s Office, the Public Office and the Police, both at the federal and state level.

The methodology is focused on the monitoring and evaluation of the criminal justice system as a public policy, in which certain conditions, skills and results have to indicate.

However, according to the information provided by Mexico evaluates in 2017, the state of Hidalgo showed poor performance in terms of conditions and advances in the implementation of the criminal justice system when located in the 30th position of 32 entities with a score of a score of170 on a scale of 0 to 600.

Therefore, local intervention in the state is necessary, in order to support the development of a diagnosis of the criminal justice system that derives in a specific action plan, in order to reverse the trend shown until the moment of thesystem implementation and mean a real change in order to consolidate the accusatory system.

This investigation aims to have a clear analysis of the implementation and development of the criminal justice system, taking as reference the State of Hidalgo and the institutions that participate in the criminal process for the delivery of justice in the entity.

Contents

We will do an analysis from the different points of view of the parties that participate in the criminal process, in an objective way in such a way that it is contextualized and the feeling of the actors of the process is understood, since their different points of view will help usSee and understand the progress of the criminal justice system.

The information of the operating institutions of the criminal justice system is necessary and important to determine whether public policies oriented to the consolidation and consolidation of the constitutional reform of the criminal system, since operators are the column of the judicial process.

It is relevant to emphasize that the new accusatory criminal system is the beginning of an equal procedure between the parties and that respects the rights that assist them are guaranteed, but there are points of view found among the parties that still manifest at a certain time that they wereviolated those rights.

Currently the justice system has received criticism from the acting parties (victims, accused) within the process by pointing out the failure of procurement, delivery and execution of punitive justice. Together other opinions only refer that the system has collapsed in the procedures and structure of the institutions in charge of the delivery of justice, call prosecution or attorney’s office, and other opinions fear that this system will be vitiate or contaminated, and return to the practices of the previous system.

In this context, criticisms are oriented in the incompetence of the legal operators of the system: preventive or investigative police, experts, agents of the Public Ministry, judges, magistrates and litigating lawyers;as well as the deficiency of research procedures for the integration of research folders.

The poor training and training of operators has been a main factor for the incorrect implementation and improvement of the system, is notorious, that the lack of training of system executors is the main cause of collapse. This implies a bad act of the parties in the process.

The training of each of the operators of the new system was taught depending on each of its functions and taking into account the institution to which they belong. They were trained from investigation police, state and municipal police, magistrate judges and public ministries;But still the system presents deficiencies in the processes.

While it is true, due process depends on the actions and performance of the subjects within the process;since for the integration of the investigation folder, each act, both research and obtaining evidence, and the evil proceeding of an operator would determine the not fulfilling the objective of the justice system is relevant.

Different analysts state that evaluations such as those presented by the “World Justice Project” in 2018 will allow to know the deficiencies and positive actions that the new criminal system is already leaving and are a reality, in addition to the aspects that do not work and need to improve.

But, in the same way, speaking of legal reforms without a comprehensive evaluation of what may or may not be dangerous, especially when there are positive results, such as that this transformation to the justice system intends and that the primary objective is theProcess quality.

On November 29, experts and officials participated in the IX National Forum on Security and Justice, held at the Pan American University;The participation of the country’s representatives was of the utmost importance, since a series of problems faced by the new criminal justice system after its implementation were identified, and in the same way some measures were raised to solve them.

According to the analysis carried out to the new justice system in the IX National Forum, the most relevant points are the following:

• Balance between the judge’s independence. Absence of an implemented system that ensures the autonomy of the judge on the one hand, and of internal restrictions, external and formal controls by the other, causing abuse of discretion in the interpretation of the rules applied to the decisions.
• Problems in the complaint of complaints. In the prosecutors there are problems in raising complaints quickly and without re-victimizing the complainants, since this is the main reason why citizens do not denounce the illicit fact. Greater training and awareness of public ministries are urgent to improve procedures in which. In addition, it is proposed that the police can receive complaints and submit detainees in flagrance directly before a judge, not the Public Ministry.
• Unattended victims. There is a lack of training for citizen care since the objective is to provide quality service to the victims and offer them mechanisms for help and alternative solutions of conflicts since the objective of the justice system is the speed of conflict. It is important to develop new management models.
• Unknown Criminal System. The bad diffusion and non -integration of society in general is the main reason why they still do not know the new criminal system and on the contrary, it only receives the bad opinions of governors and other people. In that sense, it was proposed to promote greater socialization campaigns of the new model.
• Exceeded research. The priority of the new justice system is not vicie or carry out practices and actions of the old system, and one of the most notorious that continues in the current system, is that the country’s prosecutors are exceeded in their research and actions capacitiesreferring to the various criminal acts. It is urgent to analyze new methodologies that allow more objective and analyst investigation within the system.

Even with orality, judges follow formalistic practices that remove agility to public hearings (for example, demand in writing, written records of preliminary hearings, impose formalisms during notification procedures, or demand inquisitory reports to prosecutors before approvingrepair agreements).

Poor inter -institutional communication. The poor or non -existent inter -institutional coordination between the intelligence, investigation, procurement and justice agencies.

In this sense, analysts observed and warned that the different dependencies and institutions responsible for operating the new criminal system in the country have communication problems and consequently coordination, without observing that they all pursue the same purpose that is the delivery of justice. Therefore, it is suggested to excite the use of computer technology that enables and facilitates inter -institutional coordination strategies for efficiency in the criminal justice system.

• True Criminal Persecution Policy. The policy implemented by the current government shows that there is no clear policy that defines which are priority crimes towards which prevention and combat efforts must concentrate;nor what are the actions to be followed within the security policy of the current government. Therefore, a persecution policy is proposed that defines this and that is also subject to citizen control mechanisms.
• Incompatible amparos. One of the acts promoted and more frequently and that in many occasions should not take its effects is the inappropriate use of amparo, this means of appealing a claimed act, it is becoming an obstacle to the functioning of the new justice system inthe country. Therefore, experts propose to review the amparo law and, where appropriate.
• Alternate solution media. Restricted use of “exhaust valves” in the criminal justice system, and the little termination of conflicts through the use of alternate procedures for conflict resolution and mediation that statistically resolve 35% of the litigation, and that put an end tothe processes.

Judicial criteria restrict the use by the prosecutors of alternative departures in cases of patrimonial criminal consequence (sometimes the judges approve repair agreements only when the background of the case account for the responsibility of the accused).

Court administration. The judges do not disconnect from their previous administrative roles and habits, even if they have and have professional administration systems, (this is observed in notification practices or fixation of audience schedules), in addition to the abuses and failures in the administrative management ofCourts (for example, in the allocation of causes and calendars, poor organization of auxiliary services for hearings, search for persons or evidence).

Lack of complaint systems administered through social control mechanisms (civil society).

• Corruption. Failures in the implementation of a code of ethics of the judicial official and that harm the justice system and generate high levels of corruption. Few quality control systems applied to prosecutors.
• Social environment. Resistance to the implementation and integration of society to the criminal justice systems since they do not know the formalities of the same, although it is true, society preserves the habits of the inquisitive system and the vices of the previous justice system that do not allow in that senseprogress.
• Appointment of jurisdictional authorities. The poor selection and appointment by the institutions and organs of the operators of the Justice System, which their inability in the exercise of their functions directly affects the litigation.
• Continue training. Lack of continuous training to judges, prosecutors and experts to obtain and evaluate high complexity evidence (as in cases involving criminal associations or organized crime), since there are currently various crimes that did not exist previously.
• Penitentiary infrastructure. Failures in the provision and training of police human resources in the technical research, security and prevention areas. The lack of attention paid to reform prison systems and to homologate regulations and laws.
• Criteria that hinder. In the abbreviated procedure (where the accused renounces the oral trial) the judges demand from the prosecutor the presentation of a file prepared in accordance with inquisitive criteria, which increases the times and formalism and contributes to their little use.
• The Public Defensoría. Public defenders are not accustomed to question. It is visible that the Ombudsman does not perform investigation acts that
• Action of Public Ministries. Lack of strategic leadership within public ministries, without promoting standardization and supervision systems of action criteria.
• Restriction in victim investigation acts. Restricted Activism of the victim in the process since the prosecutors do not take into consideration the test data that can help the verification of the illicit fact.
• Cause file. Prosecutors keep a high number of causes on file without any impulse, in order to meet victims expectations or not to attract supervision attention.
• Fiscal obstruction. Prosecutors are prevented to mediate, reconcile repair agreements between victims and charged by higher authorities, which prevent the resolution of litigation.
• Resolutions. Executions of sentences outside the judicial field subject to collapsed prison systems, lacking rehabilitation and stratification mechanisms.
• First respondent. Police work and work models incompatible with the Oral Criminal Justice Model of an accusatory nature;This being a fundamental cause of violation of the rights of the accused.

Consequently, weak organizational links are visualized between public police and ministries and among the same police from different geographical jurisdictions.

According to the analysis by experts and officials in the IX National Forum on Security and Justice, the deficiencies presented by the justice system in Mexico were presented, which must be corrected shortly for the due operation of the implementation of the reform of the reform of the reform ofJustice.

System analysts predict that the new criminal justice system requires time for consolidation, but that it is very important.

Mérida initiative

Mexico and the United States in December 2008, signed the first letter of agreement on the Mérida initiative. Five years after its implementation, the Mérida initiative has contributed to construction a new architecture and infrastructure for bilateral security cooperation, has provided tangible support to Mexican security and judicial institutions.

One of the main objectives of Mérida initiative is to reduce the power of Mexican criminal groups by systematically capturing and imprisoning their leaders;reduce drug trafficking gains by means of narcotics;stop money laundering and reduce drug production. The Mérida initiative through equipment, technology, aviation and training will provide foundations to achieve more effective research, increase the number of catches and arrests, achieve successful legal processes and cargo interdiction.

One of the Pillars of Mérida initiative is to institutionalize the ability to maintain the rule of law, increase the capacity of the Mexican bodies responsible for public security and the organs and institutions of the criminal justice system, borders and judicial institutions to maintain therule of law. The Mérida initiative programs will strengthen the capacities of key institutions to improve internal controls, continue with the professionalization of the police and the armed forces, reform the prison centers and implement the reform of the Justice Criminal System.

Mérida initiative aims to promote and consolidate the criminal justice system in our country, so that infrastructure support has been fundamental in the construction of orality rooms in the State in coordination with the Judicial Power of the State of Hidalgo.

Within the Mérida initiative programs:

• Corrections of the Mérida initiative. Provides assistance and training to the social reintegration centers of Mexico to obtain international accreditation. A total of 20 facilities, nine federal and nine state, have received such accreditation.
• Training. Mérida initiative has allocated 24 million dollars in training and equipment for the programs of the institutions and bodies of criminal records, internal matters and the police accreditation. These programs constitute a great effort on the part of the Mexican government to eradicate corruption and build reliable and corruption institutions.
• Infrastructure and Human Resources. The Mérida initiative has assigned more than 247 million dollars to support Mexico in the transition to the new criminal justice system, for its implementation in all entities in the country. The wide range of projects includes exchanges between state justice attorkers, advice for forensic laboratories, training, certifications, accreditations, teams and seminars for students and professors of the law career.
• Rule of law. The Mérida initiative provides assistance to professionalize Mexican institutions for the application of the law at the municipal, state and federal level, as well as to increase the capacities of its specialized research units. This assistance covers a wide range of training, including the development of instructors for federal and state police academies;Leadership and Supervision Courses and basic police skills. Around 5 million dollars have been invested in improvements to infrastructure and team donations for academies in five states and a greater number of donations are contemplated for both federal and state academies.

Conclusions

In a system of criminal prosecution of accusatory and oral court, it is first of all that a criminal conflict injures the social fabric, and that people, human beings, citizens, subjects of rights, as well as the victim and the prosecuted person, participate in that criminal fabric.and that the criminal procedure must be efficient, brief and that it is the means to impart justice rationally.

To avoid the hurry and errors in the structure of the new justice system, the federative entities are urged to generate training programs for the operators of the new system, but must include the structure, dynamics and purposes of oral judgment, and consider its aspectpractical, that is, litigation, as well as the study of alternative dispute solution mechanisms from the restorative criminal justice approach.

A review of some state institutions that currently regulate the oral accusatory trial, because it does not respond to the speed of the process, and that society demands justice must

The principle of innocence referred to, does not seem to correspond to the many constitutional provisions that procedurally affect the accused, so a review of our Magna Carta is suggested to eliminate measures that do not transcend the needs of the process, such asthe suspension of political rights from the order of linking to process and reduce or condition the hypotheses that affect the freedom and heritage of the alleged innocent.

The exercise of criminal action by individuals, provided for in the constitutional reform, has not been well received by Mexican jurists, so a review of the issue is recommended, since it is not a mandatory characteristic of the oral accusatory trial and makes theaccusatory system in mixed.

It is necessary to review the number and conditions of the alternate exits of the oral accusatory trial;Principle of ministerial opportunity;repair agreements;Suspension of abbreviated trial and trial, to avoid system dysfunction, corruption and impunity, since many of the codes that regulate the new procedural system abuse these outputs.

The consent of the offended in the application of the principle of opportunity by the Public Ministry must be required, as well as to decree the abbreviated suspension and judgment, since not all codes that regulate the oral accusatory judgment give it intervention, so it is facilitatedthe challenge and the proceeding of the process.

We will hardly have criminal justice if social injustice persists. The transformation of the traditional criminal system to an oral, accusatory and adversarial.