During the third day of debate was the discussion on the constitutional challenge presented by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) against reforms to the Telecommunications Act that allow signal tracking mobile equipment, eight of the eleven Plenary ministers are in favor of the project presented by the Minister Margarita Luna Ramos, which states declaring the constitutionality of the rules .
However, four of the judges of the High Court requesting an interpretation as they do, ie conditions for its application are established , while four more ministers are inclined to approve the proposal as Luna Ramos was presented.
The Minister Arturo Zaldivar Lelo de Larrea exposed Luna Ramos Minister through a note, usually all right to invasion of privacy requires a warrant.
According to the criteria of the American System of Human Rights and the Supreme Court can only be dispensed with such order in cases of emergency, that is when it threatens the life or physical integrity of victims of crime, or, when there is risk that is hidden or absent object of the crime.
"The rules at issue are constitutional if and only if, it is interpreted that they have application only in these exceptional circumstances, which must be sufficiently motivated by the competent authority," argued Zaldivar Lelo de Larrea.
In response, the discussion about the so-called Law of Geolocation based on Articles 133 quater of the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure, 16 first paragraph ay fraction 40 Bis of the Federal Telecommunications Act, was postponed to the Thursday session in which proposals on the interpretation as will be discussed.
