Previous 67 / 68 Next

AMPARO EN REVISIÓN 341/2022 Así lo resolvió la Primera Sala de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación por mayoría de tres votos de los Señores Ministros Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá (Ponente), Jorge Mario Pardo Rebolledo y Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena. En contra de los votos emitidos por la Señora Ministra Norma Lucía Piña Hernández y de la Señora Ministra Presidenta Ana Margarita Ríos Farjat, quienes se reservaron su derecho a formular voto particular. Firman la Ministra Presidenta de la Primera Sala y el Ministro Ponente con el Secretario de Acuerdos, quien autoriza y da fe. PRESIDENTA DE LA PRIMERA SALA MINISTRA ANA MARGARITA RÍOS FARJAT PONENTE MINISTRO JUAN LUIS GONZÁLEZ ALCÁNTARA CARRANCÁ SECRETARIO DE ACUERDOS DE LA PRIMERA SALA MAESTRO RAÚL MENDIOLA PIZAÑA 61

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Unconstitutionality of the last paragraph of article 1392 Bis of the Civil Code of Mexico City

Case Law

Country

Mexico

Country Location

Latitude: 22.450275925480113

Longitude: -99.67675799131331

Country Location (linked Case Law): Mexico

Decision Date: Nov 23, 2022

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Reversed Lower Court

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Injunction, Order, or Motion Granted

Keywords

Data Protection and Retention
Privacy

Judicial Body: Supreme Court (court of final appeal)

Court Name: Supreme Court of Mexico

Case Number: AR 341 /2022

Case Summary: On November 23, 2022, the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Mexico granted an “amparo” (habeas corpus) against the last paragraph article Article 1392 Bis of the Civil Code for Mexico City, which ordered the erasure of publicly available digital information regarding a deceased person unless, in their will, the testator expressed their intention to preserve it. In its decision, the Court found that the challenged portion of the law was unconstitutional since it was contrary to the rights of freedom of expression and access to information. Particularly the Court considered that the terms in which the provision was drafted instigated undesirable self-censorship to avoid potential liability. The Supreme Court pointed out that the so called-right to be forgotten was not regulated in Mexico and thus could not be applied without nuances since, according to the Constitution, public information remained as such regardless of factors such as the time that could affect the very essence.

Case Significance: The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Related Caselaw (self)

Related Law

Constitution of Mexico
National Security Law of Mexico

Source URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

CIPIT
Columbia

Date Updated: Jul 27, 2023

Primary Documents

2_299426_6104.pdf
Spanish
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Unconstitutionality of the last paragraph of article 1392 Bis of the Civil Code of Mexico City

Primary Documents

Notifications