In recent decades, a phenomenon that has been experienced in Latin American countries has been developing worldwide: open parliament, government and justice.
In the Mexican State this is not the exception, since it has been mainly promoted by the Inai, chaired by Blanca Lilia Ibarra, not with the imposition of the law, but with knowledge in hand and making its importance visible through seminars, courses, talks on the benefits for the institutional strengthening and credibility of the country through the exercise of the right of access to government public information.
Of course, each public authority has different powers, scope of competence and function to be performed within the country. Hence, an open parliament is not the same as an open justice or government, however, they have minimal elements in common that must be respected, such as transparency and accountability; budgetary and administrative information and in different measures; citizen participation. When these elements are complied with, the institutions of the Mexican State are strengthened.
On the subject of legislative power, open parliament must include not only citizen participation, but also that the various sectors to which the norm is directed participate and those comments are taken into account. In the case of open government, the public policies that are implemented must also take into account what the different crucibles of civil society and above all make transparent, as a general rule, public tenders, expenses and all issues related to financing to comply the principle of maximum publicity.
The case of the Judiciary is different and more complex than the other public powers in terms of citizen participation. When the parties cannot reach an agreement to settle their differences, then they go to the institutions of the administration of justice so that an impartial, independent and objective third party can resolve them. With this he defines the rights and delimits them for the parties. If there is citizen participation in matters of daily justice, which are those in which issues in civil, commercial, labor and family matters are resolved, then there could be the risk that the most powerful party or that has the most social support, is the one that seeks to impose the result. Obviously this cannot be allowed.
Thus, in these matters, open justice is respected with the aforementioned principle of maximum publicity, in the sense that it gives the general public access to all public versions of the judgments and resolutions that are issued, protecting data sensitive. In addition, for there to be a true open justice, the sentences must have a daily language, of understanding to the common people so that when they read them, they are easy to understand and it is seen how the court reasoned to resolve the conflict. As an additional point, the public versions should be easily found on the internet microsites on the official pages of the courts.
These are the minimum rights that each person has regardless of whether or not they have been a party to the conflict, since everyone has the right to see, read, understand and interpret all the judgments of the Federal Judicial Power and the local Judicial Powers -in their public version. -.
With these three aspects, it is easy to find sentences on official internet pages; have access to all the sentences in their public version and; that they have a daily language, is how it complies with the Federal and General laws, both of Transparency and Access to Public Information.
There are also matters that are of public interest, such as the case of abortion, or others in which constitutional articles that are of national interest are interpreted and given a certain scope. In these, the principle of open justice must go beyond the simple access in everyday language of the public version of the sentence because it must include citizen participation through the figure of the amicus curiae, which means “friend of the court”.
In the files in which an issue of national importance and significance is resolved by the Court, access should always be given to any group or group of people, so that they can present an amicus curiae, as happened in practice in the matters of the abortion or conscientious objection.
The amicus curiae gives the citizens a voice in the cases of public interest that the Court decides and that is important because it opens its doors to those who normally do not have access to it, but who do seek to assert the voice of a sector of the population. .
In the field of constitutional interpretation, which is the work of the Court, it must be borne in mind that the Constitution is for everyone and all governed and as such they have to feel their own, hence those same voices must be present, represented and heard in the Court, through the amicus curiae, before resolving a matter of national importance and importance that impacts the lives of millions of people.
Reference-www.eleconomista.com.mx