Previous 45 / 101 Next

SX-JE-3/2021 Y ACUMULADOS salvedad a la inviolabilidad de las comunicaciones, esto es, cuando la comunicación privada sea aportada de forma voluntaria por alguno de los particulares que participen en ellas. 125. Por el contrario, lo reprochable ante la vulneración al derecho de inviolabilidad de las comunicaciones acontece por la intercepción o el conocimiento antijurídico de una comunicación ajena y que la violación del derecho fundamental a la inviolabilidad de las comunicaciones privadas se consuma cuando se escucha, graba, almacena, lee o registra, sin el consentimiento de los interlocutores o sin autorización judicial, una comunicación ajena. 126. Así lo ha definido la Primera Sala de la Suprema Corte de justicia de la Nación a través de la tesis que lleva por rubro: “PRUEBAS EN PODER DE UNA DE LAS PARTES. EL ARTÍCULO 89 DEL CÓDIGO FEDERAL DE PROCEDIMIENTOS CIVILES NO VULNERA EL DERECHO FUNDAMENTAL A LA INVIOLABILIDAD DE LAS COMUNICACIONES PRIVADAS.”25 127. En esa misma línea, la propia Primera Sala ha establecido que el objetivo principal de proteger las Registro digital: 2009353, instancia: Primera Sala, décima época, materia(s): Constitucional, Civil, tesis: 1a. CCVIII/2015 (10a.), fuente: Gaceta del Semanario Judicial de la Federación, libro 19, Junio de 2015, Tomo I, página 599, tipo: Aislada 25 45

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

(Mexico) SX JE 0003 2021

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether there were procedural irregularities in the lower court’s decision based on the timeliness of the complaint and lack of notice by the court. Whether evidence from Facebook and WhatsApp demonstrating gender based political violence were illegally obtained and possess the truth and veracity it asserts.

Alleged Acts: Misogynistic behaviors were expressed through Facebook and WhatsApp by partisan state officials, which violated the human rights of the general secretary of a political party. Plaintiffs raise multiple procedural irregularities with the lower court’s decision. First, it is argued that the complaint was not filed within the four days provided for in the state electoral legislation and, therefore, should have been considered inadmissible because the act was consented to. Second, plaintiffs state that it was not notified of the summons in a personal way; rather, they were notified through social media channels such as Facebook. Third, plaintiffs argue it held an evidentiary hearing without notifying the parties. Finally, plaintiffs assert that the evidence taken into consideration by the local court was obtained unlawfully, violating plaintiff’s right to privacy, in addition to the fact that the proper chain of custody was not kept, nor the technical details of the mobile phone from which they were extracted.

Procedural history: Plaintiff contests the judgment issued by the Electoral Tribunal of the State of Campeche in the trials TEEC/JDC/15/2020 and its accumulated TEEC/JDC/18/2020, which among other issues, determined that members of the State Council of MORENA in Campeche exercised constitutive acts of political violence based on gender against the General Secretary of the party and consequently issued various measures of integral reparation; among them, the registration of the actors in the register of people sanctioned in matters of political violence against women on the basis of gender. Multiple appeals from members of the State Council of Campeche were joined due to each appeal focusing on the same controversy. The Federal Judiciary subsequently upheld the lower court’s ruling.

Summary: This Regional Chamber affirmed the contested sentence because the procedural irregularities alleged by the actors related to the timeliness of the lawsuit, the investigation of the local trial, and the legality of the evidence were unfounded and inoperative. The evidence from Facebook and WhatsApp was not obtained illegally because it was provided by one of the parties involved in the messages. Therefore, there was no constitutional violation to the right of privacy. Similarly, the statements related to the evidentiary value of the messages are unfounded because the principle of reversion—where the burden of proof falls on defendants to disprove the alleged human rights violations—was followed. Moreover, the reprehensible conducts were aimed at affecting the political and electoral rights of the victim due to her status as a woman.

Conclusion: Defendant’s claims were unfounded and inoperative

Legal Issue(s)

Gender

Applicable Law(s): Articles 755-758 of the Law of Institutions and Electoral Procedures for the State of Campeche

Region: Americas

Country: Mexico

Language of Decision

Spanish

Court: Electoral Court

Election Type: Local

Date of decision: Jan 21, 2021

Geolocation

Latitude: 19.43318644

Longitude: -99.13401778

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

SX-JE-0003-2021.pdf
Spanish
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

(Mexico) SX JE 0003 2021

Primary Documents

Notifications