Summary of 31 de mayo de 2021. Diplomado "Juicio de Amparo", 2021. Módulo IV. Amparo colectivo.

This is an AI generated summary. There may be inaccuracies. · The green links below are Amazon affiliate links where summarize.tech may earn a commission.
Summarize another video · Purchase summarize.tech Premium

00:00:00 - 01:00:00

This section of the Video titled "31 de mayo de 2021. Diplomado "Juicio de Amparo", 2021. Módulo IV. Amparo colectivo." discusses the concept of 'juicio amparo' (protective lawsuit) in Mexican law, specifically tied to cultural identity and cultural development. The speaker highlights the importance of cultural heritage and the need to protect it, as well as the role of the courts in preserving these rights. The section also introduces the concept of collective defense amparo, which is a type of lawsuit that can be filed to protect the rights of a group or community. The speaker explains that collective defense amparo is distinct from individualistic amparo, as it protects the rights of a group rather than an individual. In addition, the section highlights the importance of a person's common law interest in order to participate in judicial amparo.

00:00:00 In this section, the video introducing the fourth module of the Diplomado en Juicio de Amparo, Amparo Colectivo, explains the importance of the cultural courthouse of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. The cultural courthouse offers various services, such as equal access to digital books, videos, sentences, and research material for free. It also provides resources for individuals to participate in virtual events, webinars, and consultations with experts. The cultural courthouse is now accessible from any device at www.puntosverdes.dot.mx/casaculturas or www.casaculturas.mx/dot.mx.
00:05:00 In this section of the video, the speaker discusses the concept of "juicio amparo" (protective lawsuit) in the legal system of Mexico. The speaker explains that this type of lawsuit can be filed by an individual or a group of individuals, and is used to defend a specific right or interest that has been violated, according to Article 107 of the Mexican Constitution and Article 5 of the Law of Amparo. The speaker further elaborates on the two main types of "juicio amparo": self-defense amparo, which is filed by a person who holds a specific right or interest, and collective defense amparo, which is filed by a group of individuals who have been affected by the same act or decision from a legal or administrative authority. The speaker then goes on to explain the differences between collective and self-defense amparo in terms of their eligibility, with collective amparo allowing for the protection of a group of individuals and self-defense amparo only allowing for the protection of an individual. Overall, this section of the video provides an overview of protective lawsuits in Mexican law and the different types of applicable rights and interests that can be defended.
00:10:00 In this section of the YouTube video titled "31 de mayo de 2021. Diplomado "Juicio de Amparo", 2021. Módulo IV. Amparo colectivo.", the speaker discusses the concept of interest legitimate (interés legítimo) in the context of the right to protection of constitutional guarantees. The speaker explains that interest legitimate is an essential requirement for a person to participate in the judicial amparo process, which comes in several forms. The speaker also highlights that interest legitimate can be understood as the existence of a relationship between certain fundamental rights and a person who appears in a process without requiring a specific legal authorization. Interest legitimate is distinguishable from interest jurídico, as the latter arises when an individual is the subject of a legal or contractual matter, as well as when that individual has a specific interest in the situation in question. By contrast, interest legitimate may also arise in situations when an individual's action is directly affected by an authority, without requiring a direct relationship between the legal authorization and the individual's condition in a specific legal sphere. This means that the speaker considers interest legitimate to be an essential component of the judicial amparo process, as it ensures that fundamental rights are protected and individuals who have been wronged are able to seek justice.
00:15:00 In this section, the speaker is discussing the concept of collective interests in judicial protection. They explain that a group or community that is protected by law has a legitimate interest, and it is important to understand the concept to determine the type of actions that may be taken to protect these interests. The speaker mentions the three types of actions that may be taken to protect collective interests: diffuse, colectiva 'in sentido estricto,' and individual homogénea. The diffuse action is indivisible and used to protect the interests of a collective not identified, such as the environment. The colectiva 'in sentido estricto' is used to protect the interests of a specific, finite group, such as an association of colonizers. The individual homogénea is used to protect individual interests within a group, such as consumers.
00:20:00 In this section, the transcript excerpt discusses the intersection of legitimate interest and collective actions. The speaker points out that while legitimate interest and collective actions may appear similar, they have distinct rules. Legitimate interest involves damage that must be repaired, while collective actions against legitimate interest exist against an authority, service provider, or corporation. The speaker notes that there is a distinction between damages and requests, with damages indicating a need for repair. The speaker then presents a thesis on collective courts in the federation for legal representativeness, which can be consulted in the Judicial Publication of the Federation in the cited rubric. The speaker emphasizes that individual joys may represent a group's interests, as explained in Article 107 of the Constitution and Article 5 of the Amparo Law. The authorization to represent a group in the amparo is clear and regulated, requiring a well-defined interest legítima.
00:25:00 In this section, the speaker explains that individual rights are not the only rights that can be defended by the court. Collective rights are also legitimate and need to be protected. They are interests that depend on others and cannot be represented solely by a group or a particular person. The speaker also differentiates between actions colectivas civiles with a different nature and regulation in law from the court's amparo, which protects a collective legitimate interest. The court can protect a collective legitimate interest regardless of whether it comes from a group, government agency, or a single person. The speaker emphasizes that the court is accessible to any person who wishes to defend a legitimate collective interest.
00:30:00 In this section of a YouTube video titled "31 de mayo de 2021. Diplomado "Juicio de Amparo", 2021. Módulo IV. Amparo colectivo.", the speaker discusses the concept of amparo, or legal protection, for individuals and communities who have been harmed by environmental damage. The speaker notes that in order for such protection to be granted, the individual or community must have a legitimate interest in seeking amparo. However, the definition of legitimate interest is not straightforward, and must be determined case-by-case. The speaker then goes on to discuss the principle of relatividad, which is an important concept in this field. The principle of relatividad means that the protection of individual or group rights is intended to have far-reaching effects, not just to benefit the individual or group seeking protection. However, this principle is not the mother of the rule general in the legal system. Instead, the effects of this mechanism of protection only benefit narrow groups.
00:35:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the precedent set by Jackie De Sudáfrica, a former judge in South Africa, concerning the right to housing. The speaker notes that while the Supreme Court recognized this right in a written decision, it did not result in any benefit to the individual who brought the case. The speaker argues that protecting the rights of the collective is what is truly necessary to uphold the principle of amparo colectivo, which is particularly important when dealing with issues like the right to housing. The speaker also notes that the principle of relatividad admits modifications when an interest is legitimate of collective nature, and that in such cases, it is possible to access the juicio de amparo to obtain the protection of any legitimate and collective interest.
00:40:00 In this section of the YouTUBE video titled "31 de mayo de 2021. Diplomado "Juicio de Amparo", 2021. Módulo IV. Amparo colectivo." the speaker discusses the case of 152/2013, which involves a collective interest complaint aimed at challenging the constitutionality of a specific law. The question at hand is whether an individual's right to equal treatment under the law outweighs the societal concerns of such a law. The speaker points out that, in the case of 152/2013, the Supreme Court did not enter into the subject matter of the case or delve into the merits of the claim, stating that a simple application of the law was discriminatory. The speaker contends that this ruling was incorrect, as the party that made the discrimination claim argued that they also wanted equal treatment under the law and thus their right to equal treatment under the law should have been recognized. The speaker elaborates on other cases that are also involved in the proceedings, including one where a ban on the commercial promotion of processed junk food during designated children's programs is at issue. The speaker notes that the decision to promote junk food advertising in children's programs was dependent on whether or not it is in line with the Secretariat of Education's lineamientos on programming content for children. The speaker also discusses the case of a judge who recently confirmed the case of a district judge. The speaker notes that in this case, the judge's decision was in accordance with the applicable provisions of the law and the majority of legal opinion.
00:45:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the legal case of a radio station being sued by people who claim they were harmed by the station's content. The judge in the case ruled that the station did not have to allow the plaintiffs to examine their codes of ethics, because the plaintiffs did not have the right to do so. The speaker did not agree with the ruling and believes that the government has an obligation to protect the rights of listeners. The speaker also mentions the case of a law in 2017 that allowed radio and television stations to oversee their own codes of ethics, but the speaker believes that this approach is flawed and should be replaced with a system where the government sets the standards for ethics in media.
00:50:00 This is a section of a video about legal amparo, particularly the concept of collective amparo under the law of amparo in Mexico. The speaker discusses various aspects of amparo colectivo, including legal places where it can be implemented, procedures for addressing a lawsuit, the role of judicial authorities, and the process of appealing an adverse decision. The speaker also shares their personal perspective on the topic. Keywords: Amparo, colectivo, legal amparo, procedimientos civiles, corte interamericana, periciales, documentales, antropología, etnografía, communidades indígenas.
00:55:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the concept of amparo colectivo and its differences from amparo where there is a plurality of complainants. The key difference is that in amparo colectivo, the plaintiff protects a general interest that benefits a collective, rather than a specific complaint. The spokesperson states that the distinction between individual and collective interests is what sets amparo colectivo apart. Whether an interest is divisible or indivisible depends on the plaintiff's ability to create a cohesive collective. The speaker looks at a specific example from Oaxaca, where a group of people formed a collective interest around water rights, and wondered if they could demand amparo colectivo for their issues. The speaker acknowledges that there are no strict rules for when or how to demand amparo colectivo, and it is ultimately up to the courts to interpret the law and determine the best course of action for each case.

01:00:00 - 01:30:00

In this section of the YouTube video, the speaker discusses the differences between amparo colectivo and amparo adhesivo in the context of the revisión process. Amparo colectivo is used when there is a legitimate interest that is by nature colectivo, such as the environment or public works. Amparo adhesivo, on the other hand, is used when the revisión involves multiple parties, such as in a direct amparo where the authority issuing the act is questioned. The speaker also mentions the difference between the amparo colectivo and the high court's decision on the sentencia, stating that the latter maintains the relatividad of the sentence. Additionally, an amparo colectivo may be used in cases involving individual rights and interests beyond the application of the law.

01:00:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the differences between amparo colectivo and amparo adhesivo in the context of the revisión process. Amparo colectivo is used when there is a legitimate interest that is by nature colectivo, such as the environment or public works. Amparo adhesivo, on the other hand, is used when the revisión involves multiple parties, such as in a direct amparo where the authority issuing the act is questioned. The speaker also mentions the difference between the amparo colectivo and the high court's decision on the sentencia, stating that the latter maintains the relatividad of the sentence. Additionally, an amparo colectivo may be used in cases involving individual rights and interests beyond the application of the law.
01:05:00 In this section, the speaker explains the concept of "amparo colectivo" in the context of Mexican law. The amparo colectivo is a form of legal protection granted to a group of people with similar interests, such as those who are making phone calls from prisons. The speaker argues that while there may be individual interests at play in such cases, the amparo colectivo is a necessary aspect of justice and should not be discarded.
01:10:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the topic of collective amparo and its legality in Mexico. According to the speaker, the article second of the Mexican constitution opened a reflective window that allows individuals to promote actions that protect their legitimate interests. The speaker then discusses whether a demand should include individual and collective actions or how they should be instrumented. The speaker suggests that the actions requested should be directed to the authorities or the recognized authorities for the amparo, and that it is necessary to differentiate between the groups demanding the amparo and the representatives of those groups.
01:15:00 In this section of the YouTube video, the speaker discusses the concept of suplencia de queja in collective actions within the framework of amparo law. The speaker explains that, according to the law of amparo, the suplencia of a complaint in this context operates based on the principle that if a legitimate interest of a protected group by the amparo law is present, it is possible to consider suplencia of that complaint. The speaker also highlights how suplencia of a complaint in collective actions within amparo law can only be granted if the acts are suspended. The speaker emphasizes that if the suspending acts are not stopped, the suplencia cannot be granted, and the case cannot move forward. The speaker concludes by noting that the suspension can have relative effects, but it can be a necessary step for protecting the legitimate interest of the complainants.
01:20:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the use of suspension of judgment in the protective process. The suspension seeks to preserve the right of the alleged, but the speaker argues that suspending the judgment is not reasonable if it is not a justified and collective interest. The speaker argues that any decision on collective amparo must be signed by all members of the collectivity or its representative, although representatives are not necessary in this case, but must be authorized to act on behalf of the collectivity. The speaker then distinguishes between the use of individually approved amparo and the use of class action, in which all those who believe they have been wronged can bring their cases before the courts to seek compensation or temporary restraining orders. The speaker then discusses the possibility of state employees seeking collective amparo against a law that harms their right to work. The speaker argues that while there is no legitimate interest for individuals, workers have a legal interest as part of the labor relationship and can seek collective amparo through their union or other authorized representative. The speaker emphasizes that the collective amparo is an important tool to protect the rights of workers, but it is not the only way, and individual amparo can also be used depending on the circumstances of the situation.
01:25:00 In this section, Dr. Andrés González explains the concept of collective amparo and how it can be used to seek damages for harm caused. He states that amparo is a legal mechanism intended to protect the rights of the affected individuals. According to Dr. González, the procedures for repairing the damage follow the Federal Procedures for Collective Actions in the Amparo. He further explains that the intervener in the amparo process is considered an authority, being either a physical or moral person who can be recognized as an authority. Dr. González then discusses the rules related to the execution of judgment and execution of sentencing, stating that while damages can be awarded, the execution of sentencing may depend on the author's compliance with the sentence. Dr. González argues that there is a significant distinction between collective amparo and collective actions, emphasizing that they are two different things. To elaborate on this point, Dr. González discusses the importance of understanding the difference between damages and reparation. While the payment of damages is expected, the reparation process is more complex and depends on whether the authority is providing a service or a good. Dr. González also notes that in some cases, the interest simple as an intervener in the amparo process may be accepted as a legitimate legal interest even if it does not enter into an interest.
01:30:00 In this section, an announcement is made for those interested in the diplomado at the Supreme Court of Justice and human rights. The registration for the diplomado will begin on June 1, 2021, and will end on June 4, 2021. Those interested in participating are encouraged to follow the Supreme Court's website and social media pages for more information. The announcement ends with gratitude to those who have supported the program.