Zhenli Ye Gon will remain in prison; SCJN rejects protection

0
3
 Zhenli Ye Gon will remain in prison; SCJN rejects protection







© Provided by Telediario



MEXICO CITY.- Zhenli Ye Gon will remain in prison, after the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) refused to grant him an amparo through which he sought to obtain his freedom on the grounds that the crimes that accuse him have already prescribed.

During the session of the First Chamber of the country’s highest court, by majority vote, the ministers confirmed that the accusations against the Mexican businessman of Chinese origin are in force, in particular those of possession of firearms and cartridges for the exclusive use of the Army.

Since 2007, Zhenli Ye Gon has been charged with 12 crimes; the most serious, organized crime to commit crimes against health, which according to the law on the matter can carry a sentence of up to 60 years, so it is not appropriate to declare such crimes prescribed.

The project, prepared by Minister Mario Pardo Rebolledo and approved by four of the five ministers that make up the First Chamber, details that the legal precepts that establish that when there are several crimes, the statute of limitations will be set according to the one that deserves the most severe penalty. .

It emphasizes that “it is justified and reasonable that in the face of higher degrees of reprehensibility and in cases where fundamental rights are affected to a greater degree, such as when crimes are committed compared to isolated crimes, the legislator increases as it has done in the contested measure the statute of limitations to be able not only to comply with its obligations to investigate and sanction such actions, but also to discourage their commission “.

“In this context, the protection of fundamental rights that are violated by the commission of multiple crimes that constitute a contest, forms an argumentative block to which, in the specific case, this Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation considers should be given greater weight in contrast to the rights that are violated with the extension of the limitation periods established in the reform of the contested precept “, explains the project.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here