Más Información
Delfina Gómez llega a Palacio Nacional para reunión con Claudia Sheinbaum; simpatizantes le entregan peticiones
Senadores del PAN no asistirán a sesión de mega tómbola judicial; aseguran que proceso electoral carece de certeza
PAN condena que Morena busque diálogo con narcos y lo evite con la SCJN; condenan propuesta de Manuel Espino
Oposición pide al gobierno no justificar el asesinato del alcalde de Chilpancingo; solicitan intervención de la FGR
Sheinbaum defiende a Renata Turrent como directora de Canal Once; funcionaria es señalada de transfobia
The sudden appearance of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in empty streets, families in lockdown, and paralyzed industries all over the world. Nevertheless, the paralysis did not halt hospitals, which are at full capacity, all governments are working, and the food industry continues with its normal activities.
In general, the population has access to basic services. Sector such as public and private education and entertainment quickly adapted; however, other areas have yet to react and have affected society.
For example, in Mexico City, local courts decreased their activities to the minimum. Between March and May, the local courts stopped holding around 64,692 trials, affecting family, civil, and legal matters.
Recommended:
The administration of justice is noticeably stagnated throughout the country. The shut down of courts due to the pandemic will result in never-before-seen delays; moreover, there are no signs that the sector will resume its activities soon.
The swift adaptations implemented in several sectors have yet to take place in the Judicial Branch. This is the time to take advantage of technology and launch new projects.
The world will likely have to deal with COVID-19 for a few more months, as well as with the imminent risk of new outbreaks. Therefore, the delivery of justice in Mexico City, states, and townships cannot wait until things return to normal.
The attention of urgent cases is the minimum you would expect from the Judiciary. Not handling urgent cases would be incomprehensible; however, the goal must be more ambitious. There are millions of people who require courts and judges to solve important problems. Not solving these issues is against the right to justice.
gm