Senate approves “Censorship Law”: Does the era of the spy state begin?

The Senate approved the new Telecommunications Law, allowing real-time geolocation and generating accusations of censorship and espionage. Find out why this law directly affects you.

In a controversial session, the Senate approved the new Telecommunications Law. The opposition and civil society organizations have dubbed it the "Censorship Law," warning that it opens the door to mass surveillance and the creation of a "spy state."

The Mexican political landscape has become drastically polarized following the Senate's approval of the new General Telecommunications and Broadcasting Law. Sponsored by the executive branch, the reform was approved with the votes of Morena, its allies, and Movimiento Ciudadano (Citizen Movement), despite resounding rejection from the PAN and PRI. While the ruling party defends the law as a necessary step toward modernization and connectivity, its detractors warn of a serious setback for privacy and freedom of expression in Mexico.

The debate centers on articles that grant new and worrying powers to the State, fueling fears of unprecedented surveillance of citizens.

The main controversy revolves around the authorities' ability to request real-time geolocation of any mobile device from telecommunications companies, as well as record communications for up to two years.

• The Opposition's Accusation: Senators from the PAN and PRI parties have described the law as an instrument for creating a "spy and police state." They argue that the wording is ambiguous and does not explicitly require a prior court order to access this sensitive information, which could allow for government abuse.
• The ruling party's defense: Morena and its allies maintain that these powers are not new and that geolocation was already contemplated in the law since 2014, approved then by the same parties that criticize it today. They assert that the need for a court order remains, as it is stipulated in other regulations such as the National Code of Criminal Procedure.

To quell criticism, the government removed some of the most controversial articles from the original draft, such as the one that allowed for the temporary blocking of digital platforms, which had been described as a mechanism of prior censorship.

Beyond the legal text, the core of the conflict is the deep distrust of civil society and the opposition in the institutions that will handle this data. Organizations such as the Network in Defense of Digital Rights (R3D) and Article 19 have sounded the alarm.

> "The Telecommunications Law initiative, as drafted, puts digital platforms at risk of censorship and violates the privacy of millions of users' personal data..." – Alert from civil society organizations.

Experts argue that the law is ambiguous about which authorities can request information and for what purposes. This power, in a context where the use of spyware against journalists and activists has been documented, and where autonomous checks and balances such as the INAI and the IFT are weakened, generates a well-founded fear that the law could become a tool of political control rather than public security.

The battle over the Telecommunications Law has ceased to be a technical debate about regulation. It has become a referendum on trust in power and the limits society is willing to accept in the name of security, raising a fundamental question: at what cost will we seek to connect Mexico?