La citación telemática, ¿medio de agilización del proceso o motivo de nulidad?.

Abstract

Since the reform to Art. 55 of the COGEP, which incorporates the summons by telematic means, it is understood that summons through the email of the person before whom a process is being raised. However, this article makes a very vague mention of the subpoena by this means, leaving it uncertain if said subpoena has legal validity and if it is a way of expediting the processes, taking them more quickly while respecting the right to judicial protection. effective. At the same time, arguments against it arise, alleging that said means of summons violates the right to defense of the processed person, depriving him of being able to obtain a timely technical defense and violating procedural rights such as: contradiction, transparency, procedural loyalty, etc. Being a very vague reform in terms of this issue, it also gives way to the nullity of many judicial processes, since the articles provide for the telematic summons as a step prior to the summons through the press, and it is This is where different interpretations arise, since for some the interpretation of the telematic subpoena as a proper and sufficient way of perfecting the subpoena act, is the one that most favors effective judicial protection; while for others it can lead to the nullity of the process, given that there is no clear and precise record that the person prosecuted has received the summons to the lawsuit or if he received it but, he chose to act in bad faith by delaying the continuation of the process and allege that nothing was ever reported to him, thus seeking the annulment of the process.