The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) declared the crime of “halconeo” (acting as a lookout for criminal organizations) unconstitutional on Monday. This crime, defined in the Sinaloa Penal Code, resulted from a reform that took effect last year amidst the ongoing war between factions of the Sinaloa Cartel.
By a majority of six votes, the full court concluded that the law criminalized the mere act of gathering information and jeopardized freedom of expression, the right to access information, and the principle of legality.
This ruling invalidated Article 293 Bis, Section III, which had been incorporated in April 2025, following the resolution of Constitutional Action 61/2025, filed by the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH). The law established penalties of four to 15 years in prison for anyone who obtained information, through any technological means, about the activities or location of public security institutions.
In presenting the bill, Minister Giovanni Figueroa Mejía acknowledged that the provision pursued a legitimate public safety objective, but stressed that it failed to withstand rigorous constitutional scrutiny. “While the provision pursues a legitimate aim of protecting public safety and the integrity of law enforcement agencies against practices such as so-called ‘halconeo’ (acting as a lookout for criminal groups), it does not meet the requirements of necessity or proportionality in a democratic society,” he stated.
The minister warned that the central problem with the criminal offense was placing the core of the sanctioned conduct on the obtaining of information, a constitutionally protected activity. “The measure interferes unnecessarily and disproportionately with the exercise of the fundamental right of access to information, to the point of encompassing legitimate situations, such as requests for information or journalistic investigations related to matters of public interest,” he affirmed, while warning of a particularly serious chilling effect on the journalistic profession.
In contrast, Minister María Estela Ríos González voted against invalidating the bill and defended the necessity of the regulation given the context of violence facing the state.
“It’s important to understand the social reality the country is experiencing; in this case, operations are also at risk. Social reality is taking precedence in the state of Sinaloa,” he stated.
He also warned that allowing the use of technological tools, such as drones or hacking, to obtain information about operations could compromise the fight against organized crime.
With this ruling, the Supreme Court nullified the challenged article from its inception, benefiting anyone to whom it had been applied, and established a significant precedent regarding the constitutional limits of criminal policy in matters of public security in relation to the right to information.
Source: jornada
