CUARTO.- Referente a la decisión de

CUARTO.- Referente a la decisión de la Mesa del Congreso de los Diputados de no admitir la tramitación, debate y votación de la enmienda a la totalidad con texto alternativo presentada por los Diputados que suscriben esta demanda de amparo, cabe hacer mención a la doctrina constitucional según la cual
“a la Mesa de la Cámara le compete, por estar sujeta al ordenamiento jurídico, en particular a la Constitución y a los Reglamentos parlamentarios que regulan sus atribuciones y funcionamiento, y en aras de la mencionada eficacia del trabajo parlamentario, verificar la regularidad jurídica y la viabilidad procesal de las iniciativas, esto es, examinar si las iniciativas cumplen con los requisitos formales exigidos por la norma reglamentaria. No obstante el Reglamento (en este caso del Congreso de los Diputados), puede permitir o en su caso, establecer incluso, que la Mesa extienda su examen de las iniciativas más allá de la estricta verificación de sus requisitos formales, siempre, claro está, que los escritos y documentos dirigidos a la Mesa, sean de control de la actividad de los Ejecutivos o sean de carácter legislativo, vengan, justamente limitados materialmente por la Constitución, el bloque de constitucionalidad o el Reglamento parlamentario pertinente.

結果 (英語) 1:

FOUR Regarding the decision of the Bureau of the Congress of Deputies by not admitting the processing, debate and vote on the amendment to the entire alternative text introduced by Members who sign this petition for relief, it is worth mentioning the doctrine Constitution according to which
"the Bureau of the Chamber is responsible, to be governed by the law, including the Constitution and parliamentary regulations governing its functions and operation, and for the sake of that effectiveness of parliamentary work, verify legal procedural regularity and feasibility of the initiatives, ie initiatives to examine whether they meet the formal requirements of the regulatory standard. However Regulation (in this case the House of Representatives), may allow or establish well even the Bureau to extend its consideration of initiatives beyond the strict verification of their formal requirements, provided, of course, the writings and documents addressed to the Bureau, are monitoring the activity of the executive or other legislation, come precisely materially limited by the Constitution, the constitutional law or the relevant parliamentary regulation.

結果 (英語) 2:

Fourth, on the decision of the Bureau of the Congress not to accept processing, debate and vote on the amendment to the text submitted by all members who subscribe to this appeal, reference is made to the constitutional doctrine according to which "the table of the house up. To be subject to the legal system.In particular, the Constitution and parliamentary rules that regulate their functions and performance, and in the interests of the above-mentioned effectiveness of parliamentary work, check the correctness and feasibility of the legal initiatives, that is, examine whether the initiatives comply with the formal requirements laid down by the Regulation.However the Regulation (in this case, the Congress of Deputies), can allow or in his case, set the table, to extend its review of initiatives beyond the strict verification of formal requirements, provided, of course, that the documents for the table, control the activity of the executive or legislative, come,Just limited materially by the Constitution, the constitutional law or the relevant parliamentary rules.

結果 (英語) 3:

FOURTH.- concerning the decision of the Bureau of the Congress of Deputies not to admit the processing, debate and vote on the amendment to the whole with alternate text submitted by the Members who have subscribed to the present demand for amparo, mention should be made in the constitutional doctrine according to which
"to the Bureau of the Chamber it is incumbent upon it, because it is subject to the legal system,In particular to the Constitution and the parliamentary rules that govern their powers and functioning, and for the sake of the above-mentioned efficiency of parliamentary work, check the legality and the viability of the procedural initiatives, this is, consider whether the initiatives meet the formal requirements established by the regulatory standard.However the Regulation (in this case the Congress of Deputies), you can allow or in your case, establish even, that the Bureau extended its review of the initiatives beyond the strict verification of their formal requirements, provided, of course, that the writings and documents to the Bureau, they are in control of the activity of the Executive or legislative nature, come,Precisely limited physically by the Constitution, the constitutional bloc or the relevant parliamentary rules.