Is the principle of the presumption of innocence currently fully valid and operational in the Mexican accusatory criminal justice system?

Abstract

The presumption of innocence is a guarantee of the accused and one of the pillars of the accusatory criminal process, which allows any person a state of non-author until a final judicial decision is issued. The affirmation that every person is innocent until his responsibility is judicially declared, is one of the most important achievements in recent times in criminal procedural matters. The legal status of presumption of innocence is one of the essential elements that make up procedural guarantees. The constitutional reform of 2008 in the criminal justice system, in the area of criminal law and human rights, was carried out with the purpose of achieving a transition from a traditional inquisitorial system, written and private, to an oral and public accusatory system, by updating norms to the Constitution itself, as well as to the norms of the codes or regulations that allow and guarantee compliance with our Constitution. This research was conducted to analyze how the presumption of innocence is violated in the Mexican accusatory criminal justice system due to various factors, such as: the improper interpretation of the laws; the misinterpretation of antinomies and loopholes in laws; pre-trial detention and informal pre-trial detention; arbitrary detentions; and media. In the elaboration of this qualitative research, the theoretical-documentary method was applied through instruments such as documentary exploration and analysis.