The plenary session of the National Institute of Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (INAI) approved to present a constitutional controversy before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) against the presidential Agreement that declares as of national security and interest public infrastructure projects and works of the federal government.
According to the INAI commissioners, the document issued by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador on November 22 violates the principles of unassailability, definitiveness and binding nature of the resolutions of the plenary, by specifying that the information will be of national security.
From the analysis carried out by the body, it was noted that the Agreement violates the principles of constitutional supremacy and legality, because it makes an early and generalized reservation of information related to those projects or works, violating the right to know of the company.
Therefore, it was concluded that there is a possible violation of Article 6 of the Mexican Constitution, since national security and public interest are grounds for the reservation of information and the classification of the same must be carried out by the obligated subjects on a case-by-case basis, based on and motivating the determination and meeting the requirements of the damage test.
Opposition is also due to appeal
The so-called containment block in the Chamber of Senators, made up of the parliamentary groups of the PAN, PRI, MC and PRD, will file before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) an action of unconstitutionality against the presidential Agreement that declares of interest public and national security infrastructure projects and government works that are considered priority and strategic for national development, reported Julen Rementería, coordinator of the PAN.
The Citizen Movement (MC) bench, for its part, made Ólga Sánchez Cordero “astonished” for refusing to present a constitutional controversy and called on her to reconsider, “in order to safeguard the rule of law and wait for the maximum constitutional control body, the Court, decide what is conducive ”.
Reference-www.eleconomista.com.mx