The defense of Emilio Ricardo Lozoya Austin stated that it respects, but does not share, the decision of the full bench of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) not to study the grievances raised in the review resource 555/2024, promoted by the former official. In a statement released on March 9, defender Alejandro Rojas Pruneda pointed out that on March 4, 2024, the full bench of the highest court unanimously resolved not to analyze the merits of the resource presented by Lozoya. “Both Mr. Emilio Ricardo Lozoya Austin and his family respect, but do not share, the decision of the Plenary Session of the SCJN not to study the merits of the arguments presented in the review resource 555/2024,” the document states. The defense argued that by not reviewing the resource, the Court allowed a criterion to stand that, in its opinion, represents a setback in the protection of those who report crimes. “By not studying the review resource, they allowed a criterion to prevail that represents a regression in the protection standards for reporters of criminal facts,” the statement indicates. The document argues that it is the State's duty to investigate and verify the facts reported, and not to shift that burden onto those who report them. “It is the State, and not the victims or the reporters, that has the obligation to investigate criminal facts and/or prove their veracity. If the obligation to prove criminal facts is shifted from the State to the reporters or the victims, no one will report criminal facts and we will be at the mercy of crime,” the position reads. According to the defender, the resolution also implied that the highest court missed the opportunity to establish criteria that strengthen the protection of those who report alleged acts of corruption. “With that decision, our highest court missed the opportunity to establish criteria that protect reporters of corruption facts and leaves them at the mercy of the accused or reported persons,” concludes the statement signed by Rojas Pruneda.
