Mexico

CRIN would like to express our profound gratitude to our external reviewer, REDIM (Red por los Derechos de la Infancia en México) for their insightful comments on a draft of this report. CRIN also sent a draft version to the State for feedback and any comments received were taken into account in finalising the report. Any errors or inaccuracies remaining in the report are CRIN’s.

This report is provided for educational and informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. CRIN does not accept liability for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on information in this report. CRIN encourages personal and educational use of this publication and grants permission for its reproduction in this capacity where proper credit is given in good faith.

All CRIN content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 licence. No material produced by CRIN may be modified unless consent is given in writing. No material produced by CRIN may be re-used for commercial gain unless consent is given in writing.

I. National legal protections

A. Are environmental rights protected within the national constitution?

Yes. The legal provisions that set the constitutional basis for environmental rights in Mexico are contained in Articles 1, 4, 25, 27, and 73 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States (the “Constitution”).1

Article 1 establishes that every provision of law on human rights (including environmental rights) must be interpreted in accordance with the Constitution and international treaties signed and ratified by Mexico, favouring at all times the most extensive protection.2

Article 4 of the Constitution states in no uncertain terms that: “everyone is entitled to an environment suitable for their development and wellbeing” and establishes liability for environmental damage or degradation. Article 4 also recognises every individuals’ right of access to and use of clean water for personal and domestic consumption.3

Article 25 of the Constitution establishes that the State is responsible for assuring that national development is conducted in an environmentally sustainable manner and is obligated to consider the preservation and productive use of natural resources.4

Article 27 of the Constitution establishes the State’s right to regulate the use of natural resources in the public interest to ensure an equitable distribution of wealth. Consequently, the State has very specific obligations to take measures for the “planning and regulation of new [human] settlements and their maintenance; preservation and restoration of environmental balance” as well as livestock farming and co-ops.5

Finally, Article 73 authorises the Federal Congress (Congreso de la Unión) to collect taxes on the exploitation of natural resources mentioned in Article 276 and enact laws: combating environmental pollution, related to environmental protection, and related to the rights of children and adolescents, ensuring at all times their best interests, and complying with environmental international treaties to which Mexico is a party.7 Specifically, Article 73 also gives the Federal government exclusive jurisdiction to regulate hydrocarbons, mining, the lumber industry, and electric and nuclear power.8

In terms of child-specific protections, the majority of the rights established in the Constitution protect “all persons” or “all individuals,” and Article 1 of the Constitution expressly prohibits discrimination based on age. Accordingly, except as specifically provided otherwise in the Constitution itself, all of the environmental and other rights set forth therein should also apply to and protect children and adolescents.9

Children and adolescents’ rights are also specifically recognised in Article 4, which obliges the State to “make the necessary provisions to foster respect for the dignity of childhood and the full exercise of their rights.”10 It also recognises the children and adolescents’ right to have their nutritional health, educational and recreational needs satisfied for their proper development.11

Finally, children and adolescents’ rights in Mexico are protected through the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (the “CRC”). These international treaties are considered part of the supreme law of Mexico and can be directly enforced in courts.12 Since the ratification of the CRC in 1990 and the enactment of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents (Ley General de los Derechos de Niñas, Niños y Adolescentes) in 2014, the principle of the best interests of the child is a substantive right and must guide all activities undertaken by the courts, administrative authorities and legislative bodies.13

Although environmental rights are enshrined in the national legal framework, commentators have noted a significant gap in implementing the law. The National Council to Prevent Discrimination, for example, considers that the rights of children and adolescents in Mexico do not always materialise in reality because structural issues (eg. the lack of procedures, approaches and protocols for children and adolescents) continue to compound and perpetuate the discrimination children and adolescents face.14

B. Have constitutional rights protections been applied by national courts with regards to environmental issues?

Constitutional rights can be enforced in Mexico through an amparo action. The amparo is intended to protect the fundamental rights of the public against arbitrary acts or omissions of governmental entities and private parties acting as authorities. Therefore, it may be used to challenge acts or omissions of authorities (i.e. government officials or private parties acting in their capacity as authorities)15 who violate human rights recognised in the Constitution or international treaties to which Mexico is a party.

In environmental cases, the Supreme Court of Justice has enforced the distinction between private companies and private parties who are acting as authorities in environmental rights cases. In 2017, the court dismissed a lawsuit naming Buenavista del Cobre, a private company, as the defendant in an amparo challenging the toxic runoff from the company’s mine and alleging failure to comply with environmental regulations.16

However, the court did ultimately rule in favour of the plaintiff Bacánuchi community, finding that the local authority should have consulted them prior to issuing authorisation to Buenavista del Cobre to carry out its operations.17 The importance of this decision lies in the recognition of the right of citizens and communities to exercise direct participation in decision-making relating to matters of public interest, including environmental issues.18

In another case, the Academia Mexicana de Derecho Ambiental, an association interested in protecting the environment, filed an amparo against the Government of Mexico City regarding the construction of the Metrobus on Paseo de la Reforma Avenue, claiming it lacked the appropriate permits and posed a risk of irreparable environmental damage.19 The complainants alleged that the construction violated Article 4 of the Constitution (i.e. the right to protection of a healthy environment). In analysing the case, the court found that where an alleged violation could result in serious or irreversible danger to the environment, the defendant carries the burden of proof - in this case, the Municipal Government of Mexico City.20 The court ultimately suspended construction of the Metrobus because it would adversely affect the biodiversity of the Bosque de Chapultepec (Chapultepec Forest) and other natural areas.

C. Has the concept of intergenerational equity been applied within national courts? If yes, in what circumstances?

The principle of intergenerational equity requires that natural resources must be preserved in a manner that assures they are available to both present and future generations.21 The Mexican courts have applied and adopted intergenerational equity as a tesis. In Mexican law, a tesis is an abstract written expression of the criteria used to interpret legal norms. A tesis is extracted from the court’s reasoning in a particular case and becomes binding jurisprudencia (precedent) after five instances of the same expression.22

The case which established intergenerational equity as a tesis concerned the construction of a project called "Anteproyecto Malecón Cancún". Various children, adolescents and adults filed amparos against the project in their capacity as neighbours of the surrounding areas known as "Malecón Tajamar".23 In these lawsuits, the claimants challenged the granting of an environmental impact permit in favour of the National Fund for the Promotion of Tourism (“FONATUR") for logging and removal of hydrophilic vegetation, including mangrove. They alleged that this removal would pose significant harm to surrounding ecosystems.24

The court granted the amparo in favour of the complainants, ordering the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (“SEMARNAT”) to refrain from granting the environmental impact authorisation to FONATUR and for FONATUR to refrain from carrying out any actions directed towards the construction of the project. In coming to its decision, the court considered, among other things, the impact that the project would have on natural resource availability to future generations.25

The National Human Rights Commission (CNDH), whose primary role is to ensure that State institutions guarantee an effective remedy to victims when abuses occur and to reform policies and practices that lead to such violations (see part III.C), has also referred to the principle of intergenerational equity. In June 2022, it issued a Recommendation addressed to Federal authorities, the governor of the State of Jalisco and the mayors of three localities in the area regarding violations of the human rights to a healthy environment, to water and sanitation, to health and to the principle of the best interests of the child derived from the contamination of the Santiago River in the State of Jalisco.26 In this Recommendation, the CNDH reminded the government that it has "the obligation to take the necessary measures to control the quality of the waters in the State; to apply the environmental water norms established in the local Waters Law (Ley de Agua), as well as in the Mexican Official Norms (NOM's); to monitor compliance with such standards and, if necessary, to apply the corresponding sanctions".27 The CNDH added that "the responsible authorities are obliged to adopt and implement applicable legal frameworks to protect against environmental damage, since they have a mandate not only to prevent pollution, but also to reduce the effects of pollution by collecting and treating, and if possible, reusing wastewater", especially when water pollution presents a risk factor both to the ecosystem and to human health and life.28

The CNDH is not a national court, and its recommendations are not binding, but it is important to note that it highlighted, in accordance with the aforementioned tesis, "the close link of the human right to a healthy environment with other rights" and "the obligation of the authorities to observe the principles of: prevention, precaution, intergenerational equity, progressivity, responsibility, sustainability and congruence, in matters related to the maintenance of ecological balance and environmental protection, with the aim of optimising the quality of life of people in the present and in the future".29

D. What legislation is in place to regulate environmental protection? Are there any proposals for legal reforms currently under review in the national legislature?

Environmental protection is concurrently regulated at Federal, State and Municipal levels, as determined by the Federal Congress. Therefore, the legal framework applicable to environmental protection includes regulations issued at all three levels of government.

At the Federal level, environmental laws are complemented and further detailed by (i) secondary regulations issued by the corresponding environmental administrative agencies, and (ii) by Mexican official standards (normas oficiales mexicanas or “NOMs”), which are “binding specifications, standards, values and characteristics applicable to any products, process, facilities, systems, activities, services or methods of production.”30

International instruments signed by Mexico and ratified by the Mexican Senate are also a source of environmental law, and Mexican courts can enforce the human rights protections contained within them.31 Mexico has signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, as well as the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (the “USMCA”).

Federal Environmental Laws:

  • (a) General Law on Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente or “LGEEPA”):32 This is the framework environmental law in Mexico, and distributes powers between the Federal, State and Municipal levels in connection with environmental protection and ecological balance. The LGEEPA sets out basic environmental law principles, including: (i) core obligations in the management of natural resources; (ii) environmental protection guidelines, including air, water and soil pollution regulations and hazardous waste provisions, (iii) access to environmental information and (iv) environmental complaints before the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (“PROFEPA”).33
  • (b) Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility (Ley Federal de Responsabilidad Ambiental):34 This law regulates environmental responsibility arising from environmental damage. It includes restoration (i.e. repair of the environment to its base state) and compensation measures (i.e. when repair of the damage is materially or technically impossible or when several conditions set forth in said law are met).

    Individuals, non-governmental organisations, PROFEPA, and State environmental protection agencies can all seek responsibility for environmental damage through: (i) Federal judicial proceedings (including class actions regulated under Article 17 of the Constitution), (ii) alternate dispute resolution mechanisms, (iii) administrative proceedings and (iv) criminal proceedings related to environmental damage.
  • (c) National Waters Law (Ley de Aguas Nacionales):35 It regulates the exploitation, use, distribution and control of national waters, as well as the preservation of the quantity and quality of national waters, including their protection from pollution.
  • (d) General Law on Wildlife (Ley General de Vida Silvestre):36 It regulates habitat conservation policy and sustainable use of wildlife, including hunting permits, extractive and non-extractive utilisation of wildlife and scientific research. This law distributes powers between the Federal, State and Municipal levels in connection with wildlife matters.
  • (e) General Law on the Prevention and Comprehensive Management of Waste (Ley General para la Prevención y Gestión Integral de los Residuos or “LGPGIR”):37 It regulates waste generation as well as the recovery and management of hazardous, urban solid and special handling waste, in order to prevent and repair pollution. The LGPGIR includes provisions regarding programs for the prevention of waste generation at every level of government, authorisations for the management of hazardous waste, a registry of generators of hazardous waste, and the sanctions applicable to individuals and entities who pollute through hazardous waste.
  • (f) General Law on Climate Change (Ley General de Cambio Climático): It broadly regulates several issues related to climate change, including:38 (i) the distribution of powers between the Federal, State and Municipal levels in connection with climate change; (ii) the basis for the preparation of a climate change national policy; (iii) the creation of several government bodies to fight climate change, including the Inter-Secretarial Commission for Climate Change and the Climate Change Council; and (iv) the creation of the national gas emissions registry.
  • (g) General Law on Sustainable Forest Development (Ley General de Desarrollo Forestal Sustentable):39 It regulates the sustainable management of forest territories, as well as the conservation, protection, restoration, production, management, cultivation and use of the country's forest ecosystems and their resources, including the authorisation for the use and exploitation of timber forest resources. This law also distributes powers between the Federal, State and Municipal levels in connection with forest development.
  • (h) Law of Dumping in Mexican Marine Areas (Ley de Vertimientos en las Zonas Marinas Mexicanas):40 It regulates preventative measures to mitigate pollution or alteration of the sea by dumping in the Mexican marine areas. The law establishes the conditions and scenarios where dumping is allowed, the permits to dump specific substances in the Mexican marine areas, and sanctions related to improper dumping.
  • (i) Law of the National Agency of Industrial Security and Environmental Protection for the Hydrocarbon Sector (Ley de la Agencia Nacional de Seguridad Industrial y de Protección al Medio Ambiente del Sector Hidrocarburos):41 It creates the National Agency of Industrial Security and Environmental Protection for the Hydrocarbon Sector, which is in charge of the protection of individuals, environment and facilities of the hydrocarbons sector through surveillance activities and issuance of regulation.

Other Relevant Legislation:

In addition to the environmental laws described above, there are certain Federal laws which contain provisions related to environmental protection whilst not specifically being environmental legislation. These are as follows:

  • (a) General Health Law (Ley General de Salud):42 This law includes a specific chapter regarding the impact of the environment on public health. This chapter authorises the Ministry of Health to, among other things, determine maximum levels of exposure to toxic substances, issue NOMs regarding water treatment for human consumption and establish the conditions for sewage treatment.
  • (b) Federal Criminal Code (Código Penal Federal):43 It includes a chapter of crimes against the environment and environmental management, including, among others, performing activities with hazardous waste that result in a damage to public health or wildlife, discharging pollutants into the atmosphere, marine waters or the soil, causing damage to natural resources, public health or wildlife.
  • (c) General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents (Ley General de los Derechos de Niñas, Niños y Adolescentes):44 Article 43 explicitly protects the rights of children and adolescents to live in a healthy and sustainable environment, “and in conditions that enable their development, well-being, healthy and harmonious growth, physically as well as mentally, materially, spiritually, ethically, culturally and socially.” Furthermore, Article 14 of the General Law on Children and Adolescents, provides that “[c]hildren and adolescents have the right to have their life, survival and dignity protected and their integral development guaranteed. They cannot be deprived of their lives under any circumstances.”45 It adds that the Federal authorities, the authorities of the Federal entities, of the municipalities and of the territorial divisions of the Federal District are responsible of undertaking the necessary actions to ensure children and adolescents’ development, and prevent any behaviour that puts their survival at risk, as well as to investigate and penalise effectively acts of deprivation of life. The General Law on Children and Adolescents also recognises the right of children and adolescents to enjoy a full life under conditions that meet their dignity and that ensure their comprehensive development (Article 15) and their right to not be deprived of their life, under any circumstances (Article 16).
  • (d) General Law on Administrative Responsibilities (Ley General de Responsabilidades Administrativas):46 It establishes the administrative faults of public servants and individuals for acts or omissions in the exercise of their duties, stating that faults in environmental matters by public servants result in sanctions ranging from a private reprimand to disqualification from holding public office. These are enforced by the Internal Monitoring Bodies of the bodies to which the public servants are attached to or, in the case of serious faults, by the Federal Court of Administrative Justice.

Proposals for legal reforms currently under review in the national legislature:

There have been reform proposals related to three of the major laws described above.

In 2018, a draft bill was presented to reform Article 43 of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents (Ley General de los Derechos de Niñas, Niños y Adolescentes)47 with the aim of making the Federation, the States of the republic and municipal public administrations responsible for promoting the protection, preservation and improvement of the environment with a child-friendly approach.48 This proposed bill was rejected.

A project to enact a new General Law on National Water is currently being discussed in Congress to address the human right of universal access to drinking water, in accordance with a 2012 amendment to Article 4 of the Constitution. This proposal includes regulating access to water for vulnerable groups such as indigenous communities. In case of enactment, such law would repeal the current General Law on National Water.49

There have also been approximately 40 projects to reform the LGPGIR in order to reduce production of single-use plastic, none of which has been enacted by Congress.50

Finally, there is a project to amend the General Law on Sustainable Forest Development to decentralise forest development and further clarify distribution of authorities between the levels of government.51

E. Is there any specific national policy addressing childhood exposure to toxic substances? If so, what is considered a safe level of exposure and what is the process for determining safe levels of exposure?

There are no national policies addressing exposure to toxic substances specifically for children and adolescents. However, there are several NOMs issued pursuant to the General Health Law, which regulate exposure to toxic substances in general (without including specific criteria or limits applicable to children and adolescents).

Notwithstanding the above, several of the generic NOMs have been prepared taking into account the impact on children and adolescents of exposure to various substances, as listed in the Preambles.

The Ministry of Health (Secretaría de Salud) is responsible for evaluating the impact of air pollution on health and establishing the permissible limits of concentration of pollutants in the atmosphere. The main NOMs regarding exposure to substances regulate ozone, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and lead.52

In 2018, Mexico’s President, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, vowed to ban fracking and any “economic, productive, commercial or touristic project that affects the environment”.53 However, although the government states that no new fracking activities in the development and exploitation of petroleum products have been authorised (2019-2020), the proposed ban on fracking has not been translated into policy terms or practice. The lower house of Mexico’s Congress ringfenced 3.35 billion MXN in the 2019 budget for the evaluation of shale formations in various Mexican basins.53 Of the 32,464 existing wells, 7,879 have been fracked,54 and in 2023, the Agency for Safety, Energy and Environment (Agencia de Seguridad, Energía y Ambiente (ASEA)) announced the preparation of a new environmental regulation for the use of fracking in the country.

F. Is the country equipped with pollutant release and transfer registers? If yes, do these registers take into account child specific factors regarding the substances for which data is gathered and the type of data generated?

Yes, Mexico has a Federal pollutant release and transfer register (registro de emisiones y transferencia de contaminantes, or “PRTR”). However, this register does not take into account child-specific factors for the listed substances. Primarily an environmental policy instrument, the PRTR compiles, integrates and releases public information on potential environmentally hazardous pollutants from a wide variety of sources.

Annually, the PRTR discloses information on release and transfer of the 200 substances listed in NOM-165-SEMARNAT-2013.56 The PRTR provides public information on the name and geographic location of the individual or corporation releasing the substances. The substances are classified as per their persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity and level of contribution to climate change, providing an in-depth overview to the public.57

Pursuant to Article 109 Bis of the LGEEPA, each State, Mexico City, the municipalities and administrative divisions must all create a PRTR within their respective jurisdictions. Persons or entities responsible for pollution sources must provide the information necessary to create the register to all these government bodies.58

Greenpeace, in cooperation with Red por los Derechos de la Infancia en México (REDIM), published a report on air quality diagnosis and the right of children and adolescents to clean air, which reveals the particular effects it has for children and adolescents after reviewing the scientific evidence that proves that they are more impacted by air pollution than the adult population due to their physiological characteristics.59 The report also suggests a system of air quality indicators with their corresponding impact on the right to health of children and adolescents to monitor the issue, inform children, and generate public policies that address the problem.60 These proposals remain to be considered and implemented.

G. Does the State assert extra-territorial jurisdiction for any environmental issues?

As a general rule, Mexico does not assert extra-territorial jurisdiction for environmental issues.61 However, Mexico has ratified certain bilateral and multilateral trade agreements which give individuals the right to legal recourse against other parties who breach specific environmental standards contained in those agreements.

For example, pursuant to the USMCA (which entered into force on July 1, 2020), each party must have in place laws and regulations to comply with a list of international environmental agreements including, among others, the Montreal Protocol, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, and the Protocol Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships.

If a party to the USMCA breaches any of these agreements, any other party or an individual - through the Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation - could file a complaint. The remedy would be a sanction against the breaching country.62

 
 

II. Accessing courts

A. How can environmental cases be brought before national courts?

Civil Courts

Civil liability is regulated by the LGEEPA, the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility and the Civil Federal Code. Civil liability is independent from criminal responsibility, which arises from the commission of the environmental crimes stated within the Federal Criminal Code.

Article 203 of the LGEEPA provides that “every person who contaminates or deteriorates the environment, or affects natural resources or biodiversity, will be held responsible and be obliged to repair the damage caused, in accordance with the applicable civil law.”

Civil lawsuits may be brought through either individual or collective actions. The Federal Code of Civil Procedure (the “Civil Procedure Code”) outlines the process that individuals must follow to seek recourse via the civil route.63 Generally, individuals must prove that they have suffered personal harm to their property derived from environmental damage.

Under Mexican law, there are three types of civil collective actions:

  • i. Diffuse actions: these are indivisible claims brought to protect diffuse rights or interests belonging to an undetermined community, which are more suitable for the defence of the environment64;
  • ii. Collective actions in the strict sense: these are indivisible claims brought to protect common rights or interests belonging to a determined or determinable community or group based on common circumstances; and
  • iii. Individual homogeneous actions: these are divisible claims brought to protect individual rights or interests that have a collective impact, belonging to individuals in common circumstances.

Criminal Avenue

Federally, the Criminal Code, LGEEPA, and the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility govern criminal liability for environmental harms. Additionally, each State’s criminal code regulates environmental harms.

The LGEEPA establishes two ways to bring a Federal criminal action for environmental offences.65 First, whenever a Federal authority becomes aware of an act or omission that might be construed as an environmental crime, they shall denounce such crimes to the Federal Public Prosecutor.66 Individuals may also bring a complaint regarding an environmental crime directly before the Federal Public Prosecutor.67

Additionally, individuals can notify PROFEPA (or the corresponding municipal authority upon the absence of a PROFEPA office) of potential environmental crimes by bringing a popular complaint (“denuncia popular”).68 PROFEPA or the corresponding municipal authority must denounce these to the Federal Public Prosecutor.

Administrative Avenue

The main government agency in charge of enacting and enforcing environmental regulation at the Federal level is the SEMARNAT, the enforcement arm of which is the PROFEPA, which has the power to impose sanctions for non-criminal cases.69 The process through which citizens can participate in environmental protection is by bringing a popular complaint70 (denuncia popular) to PROFEPA for possible acts and/or omissions that cause or may cause environmental damage. This instrument can be used by an individual or by a group.

The denuncia popular must be submitted in writing and the complainant must identify themself by name, provide an address and telephone number, establish the facts that constitute the potential infraction, provide details of the offender, and where appropriate, provide the respective evidence. The complainant may request that PROFEPA preserve the complainant’s anonymity, in which case, PROFEPA will process the complaint in its own name.71

As opposed to civil liability, environmental liability under the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility does not seek to repair the property of the affected party, but rather to restore the environment to its previous state or, when impossible, to impose an economic fine.72

Local and municipal agencies may also impose administrative liability for environmental breaches to local and municipal statutes.

Finally, the LGEEPA also establishes a revision process for parties affected by government breaches of LGEEPA.73 Under the revision procedure, the parties may claim that a particular measure did not comply with sustainable development procedures as set forth in Article 3(XI) of the LGEEPA. Alternatively, the claimant may argue that the measure in question does not comply with substantive principles of environmental policy pursuant to Article 15 of the LGEEPA, including for example, the polluter-pays principle, prevention principle and intergenerational equity principle. A claimant must first exhaust this revision process before bringing an amparo action.74

Constitutional Avenue

The amparo is an action to vindicate human rights violations - including environmental rights - committed by governmental authorities or private parties acting in their capacity as authorities. Through an amparo action, a person can challenge, among others, (i) unconstitutional laws and regulations, (ii) illegal judicial resolutions, and (iii) illegal final administrative decisions, resolutions and awards. As further described in Section II.B, an amparo can be brought by an individual, entity or group, based on a legitimate or legal interest.

Through an amparo claim, courts may order an injunctive relief for the temporary suspension of the authorities’ acts or omissions in order to preserve the situation and prevent the authority’s act or omission from further harming the environment. This suspension measure is particularly important in those environmental cases in which harm could be irreparable (e.g. destruction of an ecosystem).75

National Human Rights Organisations

In Mexico, anyone, including children and adolescents, has the right to submit a complaint directly to the National Commission of Human Rights (“CNDH”), an autonomous public body of the Mexican State whose mission is the defence, promotion, study and dissemination of human rights recognised in the Mexican Constitution, international treaties and laws. Any person who considers that their human rights have been violated by the actions or omissions of an administrative authority or Federal public servant, with the exception of those that belong to the judiciary, can bring a case to the CNDH. CNDH has the authority to investigate the facts and, where appropriate, issue a non-binding recommendation.76

The recommendation indicates to the authority its responsibility in the violation of human rights, specifying how it must restitute or repair the damage to the affected party. The authority that receives the recommendation must state whether it accepts it and provide the Commission with evidence that proves compliance with the recommendation. In the event that the authority refuses the recommendation, it must provide a satisfactory reason for refusal, and the CNDH may then request their appearance before the Senate.

The CNDH is also authorised to denounce human rights violations before the Federal Public Prosecutor.

After domestic remedies have been exhausted, individuals or groups of individuals, including children and adolescents, may submit petitions to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) regarding alleged violations of the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR).77 When a petition is declared admissible, the IACHR attempts to reach a “friendly settlement” between the parties concerned. If this is not possible, the IACHR will reach a decision based on the merits, which consists of non-binding recommendations to the State to make reparations or change the law.

In 2016, the IACHR published a report on the Human Rights Situation in Mexico, drawing particular attention to the criminalisation of environmentalists for their activism.78 Further, in 2020, the IACHR issued precautionary measures in favour of the inhabitants around the heavily contaminated Santiago River. The IACHR ordered Mexico to provide medical diagnosis for contamination-related illnesses.79 As an example of the damage caused by environmental pollution, the applicant cited the death of a child who fell in the river in 2009, and the IACHR specifically referenced the increased vulnerability of children and adolescents to the arsenic levels in the river.80

If the State does not comply with the recommendations of the IACHR, the IACHR may refer the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which interprets and applies the ACHR and other Inter-American human rights treaties, and issues a judgement, which may include an order to pay reparations to the victim(s) of human rights violations. The Court’s judgements are legally binding on the State.

B. What rules of standing apply in environmental cases?

Civil Avenue

As noted above, civil claims are limited to violations of environmental law that have resulted in harm to the plaintiff or to the plaintiff’s property. This is in part due to a lack of standing to sue, and in part due to the nature of Mexico’s civil code legal system: a member of the public who has suffered no harm but believes that an environmental law has been violated may bring a popular complaint to PROFEPA.81

Under the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility, claimants must prove their legitimate interest. Four groups of claimants have a statutory legitimate interest:82

  • (i) Inhabitants of the community adjacent to where the environmental damage was caused;
  • (ii) Mexican non-profit organisations incorporated to promote or protect environmental rights, acting on behalf of an inhabitant of the community adjacent to the damage;83
  • (iii) PROFEPA;
  • (iv) Local environmental protection agencies.

Additionally, collective interests may be defended through class actions exercised before Federal courts.84 In order to bring a collective action related to environmental harm, claimants must have their diffuse, common or individual rights or interests with a collective impact harmed. These collective actions can be initiated by:

  • (i) PROFEPA;
  • (ii) a common representative of at least 30 members of the community;
  • (iii) non-profit organisations incorporated to promote or protect environmental rights; or
  • (iv) the Attorney General.

Criminal and Administrative Avenues

Any person who is aware of a potential environmental crime or violation can bring a complaint before the Federal Public Prosecutor or PROFEPA, irrespective of the existence of a direct or indirect harm suffered by such person.85

Any person who has knowledge of an environmental crime or violation by public servants may file a complaint of possible administrative misconduct with the Secretariat of Public Administration.86

Constitutional Avenue

To bring an amparo, an aggrieved party must show that the act or omission violates their legal rights, either personally and directly (“interés jurídico”; legal interest) or due the individual’s special situation in relation to the law (“interés legítimo”; legitimate interest).87

A legal interest derives from the violation of a subjective right that is said to have been violated and caused a corresponding grievance. On the other hand, a legitimate interest requires that: (i) there is a constitutional norm in which a diffuse interest is established or protected for the benefit of a specific community, (ii) a particular act violates that individual or collective interest and (iii) that the claimant belongs to that community.

Two or more claimants may initiate a collective amparo proceeding, as long as they can prove that all members of the group have suffered a common impairment caused by the same authority, even if the act or omission that caused the impairment is not the same for each individual. Any party with a legitimate interest (individual or collective) may also join an amparo suit.

For example, in a collective amparo, which was brought by a group of fishermen and farmers of the municipalities of Huimanguillo and Cárdenas against several Federal authorities including Pemex (the State owned oil company) for the pollution caused by oil extraction activities, a Federal court recognised the claimants legitimate interest and ordered PROFEPA to investigate, sanction and order reparations for the environmental damages caused by Pemex.88

In the case of "Malecón Tajamar" described in Section I.C, the Supreme Court of Justice analysed the admissibility of the case based on the plaintiffs’ legitimate interest (as the case had been previously dismissed by a lower court for lack of legitimate interest).89 The Court resolved that the plaintiffs (children and adolescents residing in the city where the project was being built) did have a legitimate collective interest, since they promoted the amparo suit as residents of the affected city in order to protect their human right to live in a healthy environment for their development and welfare.90

C. Do these rules of standing differ when children are the complainants and if so in what way?

The Offices for Protection (Procuradurías de Protección), which are administrative units of the National DIF System and the State DIF systems, are responsible for representing the interests of children and adolescents in judicial and administrative proceedings in addition to or in substitution (in some instances defined by law) of those exercising their primary representation.91

Civil Avenue

In civil cases, children must act through their legal representatives (e.g. parents or guardians). Pursuant to Mexican law, only people with legal capacity are entitled to initiate a civil judicial proceeding, and children are deemed to lack legal capacity. 92

Criminal Avenue

In criminal and administrative actions, children can submit complaints to the Federal Public Prosecutor or PROFEPA without any special standing requirements.

Constitutional Avenue

As noted above, Article 4 of the Constitution states in no uncertain terms that: “[e]very individual has the right to live in a healthy environment for her development and welfare”. Moreover, Article 3.G of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents specifically provides minors full and equal protection of their human rights and constitutional guarantees.93

Accordingly, children and adolescents are entitled to bring amparo actions for the protection of their environmental rights when such rights are violated. Such actions can be brought personally if a child’s legal representative is absent or is prevented from or refuses to bring such action94 - in which case, the court shall appoint a special representative. The court will give preference to a close relative unless there is a conflict of interest or any other reason why a different person should be appointed. If the person is 14 years old or older, they can choose their own representative.95

D. What is the burden and standard of proof for allegations of personal injury as a result of toxic exposure?

In the context of civil claims, the burden of proof will depend upon whether the cause of action is based on subjective or objective liability.

In subjective civil liability cases, the victim has the burden of proof to show a causal link between the perpetrator’s actions and the harm suffered by the victim. Specifically, the victim must prove that the actions which caused it to suffer harm were at least negligent. In general, liability for environmental damage under the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility is subjective.96

Environmental liability will be objective or “strict” only when the damage caused to the environment is a direct result of:97

  • Any act or omission relating to hazardous materials or waste;
  • The use or operation of vessels in coral reefs;
  • Engagement in activities considered as highly hazardous (i.e. activities involving generation or handling of substances with corrosive, reactive, radioactive, explosive, toxic, flammable or biological-infectious characteristics, in terms of the LGEEPA); and
  • Actions contemplated by Article 1913 or the Federal Civil Code (e.g. use of mechanisms, instruments, devices or substances dangerous by themselves).

In these instances of high-risk activities, it is sufficient for the victim to prove that the defendant committed the dangerous act, there was damage, and there is at least a probability that the act caused the damage. The burden is on the defendant to disprove causation.98

Moreover, Mexican courts have recognised the environmental cases inherently involve a context of scientific uncertainty. Therefore, the courts have given weight to the precautionary principle in amparo actions by reversing the burden of proof onto the party responsible for the environmental harm once the plaintiff has established that there is a risk of environmental harm.99 The precautionary principle, codified as Principle 15 in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992, is one tool which provides such assistance in situations of uncertainty posed by environmental law; “where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”.

Article 8.3 of the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean,100 of which Mexico is a party, recognises that member States have an obligation to facilitate proof of environmental damage. One method for doing so is to reverse the burden of proof from the victim to the perpetrator. This places the burden of proof on the party that is best placed to prove and pay the price of uncertainty, regardless of their cooperation.

E. What limitation periods apply in environmental cases?

Under Mexican law, the limitation period will often depend on the type of action being pursued by the complainant. In civil cases, the limitation period for claiming environmental liability under LGEEPA is five years from the date of commission of the act. Under the Civil Procedure Code, the period is three and half years. This limitation period, however, is only procedural; therefore, affected parties may still pursue other legal avenues (e.g. civil responsibility action under Article 203 of the LGEEPA), after this time has elapsed. Under the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility, the limitation period for environmental claims is 12 years from the date of the damage and its alleged effects occurred.101

In criminal cases, the limitation period depends on the crime committed and the possible sentence. In administrative cases, the general limitation period is five years.

Subject to four exceptional circumstances,102 the limitation period for bringing an amparo claim is 15 days as of (i) the following day to that on which the notification of the challenged act becomes effective (e.g. the notification of the judicial resolution or of the issuance of an environmental permit); or (ii) the following day to that on which the complainant otherwise becomes aware of the act or omission in question.103

For self-executing laws and regulations, (i.e. those that do not need a concrete act of application from an authority to impact the persons obligated by such laws/regulations, but rather become executable by their mere entry into force), the limitation period for bringing an amparo claim is 30 days from the entry into force of the relevant law or regulation.

Complaints before the National Human Rights Commission must be lodged within one year, but the CNDH may extend this period in the case of gross violations of fundamental rights.104

Finally, a petition to the IACHR must normally be filed within six months of final domestic judgement.105

F. Is legal aid available in environmental cases? If so, under what circumstances?

Persons who are unemployed, underemployed, retired, indigenous, or persons who require legal aid for any social or economic reasons are given preference when it comes to legal aid for non-criminal matters.106

In civil cases, all the costs associated with appearing in court are absorbed by the government, including court fees, witnesses’ expenses, and costs for court activities conducted outside where the trial takes place. Where legal aid is not available, children and adolescents or their representatives may seek pro-bono legal assistance from the Asociación de Servicios Legales (“ASL”), administered by the Mexican Bar Association or other non-profit organisations. Aid from the ASL is only available to individuals and groups who lack access to justice; for example, because they face extreme poverty or illiteracy, they have a physical or mental disability, they belong to a minority group or they are victims of discrimination.107

Some Mexican Universities also provide free legal advice clinics and can represent individuals in court. For example, the Universidad Panamericana litigates cases before almost all courts, including civil and criminal courts. The University’s acceptance of a case takes the individual’s socioeconomic status into consideration, as well as the jurisdiction of the case, the visibility of the claim and the ethical repercussions of representation.108

 
 

III. Remedies

A. What remedies are courts empowered to impose in environmental cases?

Civil law remedies

The LGEEPA recognises that every person that pollutes or deteriorates the environment or affects natural resources or biodiversity will be obliged to repair the damages caused in accordance with the Federal Civil Code. Under the Federal Civil Code, possible remedies for unlawful acts include restitution, whenever possible, or payment of damages.109 Moral damages, which involve compensation for harm caused to a person’s feelings, beliefs, reputation, private life or physical appearance, can also be awarded.110 Finally, the Federal Civil Code provides for landlords’ obligation to repair the damages caused by harmful smoke or gases, the felling of trees (when they are not caused by force majeure), and by sewage emissions or deposits of infectious materials.111

Criminal law remedies

Criminal liability involves prison sentences that may range from three months up to 12 years, as well as fines that are calculated taking into account the yearly earnings of a person convicted of a crime. In instances of repeated serious crimes, a judge may order the dissolution or liquidation of companies that have been involved in environmental crimes committed by their employees or legal representatives.112

Under the Federal Criminal Code, courts can impose the following additional sentences and security measures:

  • (i) repair of and compensation for environmental damage in accordance with the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility;

  • (ii) suspension, modification or demolition of construction works or activities;

  • (iii) reinstatement of natural habitat, specimens or species of wild flora and fauna;

  • (iv) the return of hazardous materials or wastes or specimens of wild flora and fauna; or

  • (v) the disqualification of the perpetrator or participant of the crime if they are a public servant.113

Criminal liability can also arise at a local level, pursuant to the criminal codes of each State. The corresponding remedies will vary depending on each specific code. Thus, for example, the Mexico City Criminal Code provides criminal liability for companies which could entail the company’s dissolution, when their legal representatives and/or de facto officials commit an environmental crime on the company’s name, behalf and benefit and where the company has not exercised “due control” (debido control) over such representatives / officials.

Remedies under the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility

The Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility allows claimants to pursue repair or compensation in addition to any available civil or criminal remedies.114 If the damage is caused by a malicious act or omission, the defendant will be liable for an economic sanction unless a criminal judge has already issued a fine related to the same illegal conduct. Such sanctions may amount to 50,000 times the measurement and updating unit (“UMA”) (equivalent to approximately USD$192,000) when the wrongdoer is an individual, and 600,000 times the UMA (equivalent to approximately USD$2,300,000) when the wrongdoer is a legal entity.115

Administrative law remedies

Possible administrative sanctions for governmental officials, officials of decentralised government bodies acting in their capacity as authorities, or private persons who enter into agreements with the Federal public administration may consist of:

  • (i) a warning,

  • (ii) a fine,

  • (iii) an additional fine for each day the violation persists,

  • (iv) arrest for up to thirty-six hours,

  • (v) temporary, permanent, partial or total closure and

  • (vi) any other sanctions that laws and rules provide for.116

The Federal Law on Contentious Administrative Proceedings allows parties whose legal interests are affected by an administrative resolution to initiate contentious administrative proceedings. The remedies under the Federal Law on Contentious Administrative Proceedings include decisions on the (partial or total) validity of the contested resolution, orders reinstating the procedure that led to the contested resolution from the moment when the violation was committed, decisions on the amount of administrative sanctions, declaratory relief in relation to the existence of a plaintiff’s right, and orders for public entities to pay compensation for the damages caused by their public servants.117

Constitutional law remedies

The Federal Law on amparo proceedings allows courts to grant restitution (returning the plaintiff to the pre-violation period) and declaratory relief ordering competent authorities to respect a plaintiff’s right. Additionally, courts in an amparo proceeding may grant a temporary injunctive relief for the suspension of the authorities’ act or omission while the proceeding is being held to prevent further damage to the environment.

If the contested act is found to be unconstitutional, the court can resolve that the act and any corresponding norms cease to have effects on the plaintiff.118 If a general law is found to be unconstitutional in two consecutive rulings of the Supreme Court or its chambers, the Supreme Court shall request the authority that issued the law to modify the provisions that are deemed unconstitutional. If the authority fails to modify the law within 90 days, the Supreme Court may issue a general declaration of unconstitutionality, which suspends the application of the unconstitutional law or provision with general effects (vis-a-vis effects on the plaintiff).

Courts may use public force to execute their resolutions in an amparo proceeding. According to the Federal Law on amparo proceedings, the Supreme Court can remove and prosecute any authority that does not comply with an amparo judgement.

B. What remedies have courts ordered in environmental cases to date?

In one case, a developer of an Ecological Theme Park project in the city of Tampico (Tamaulipas) was allegedly destroying wetlands and mangroves without prior authorisation by SEMARNAT. Through an amparo proceeding, the court ordered the responsible municipal authorities to (i) refrain from executing the acts complained of in relation to the development of the Ecological Theme Park project and (ii) restore the mangrove zone located in the area where the project would be carried out.

In addition, the court ordered SEMARNAT and the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity to issue a recovery and conservation plan setting out (i) specific guidelines for actions by the responsible municipal authorities and (ii) a schedule of implementation of these actions to ensure that the responsible municipal authorities comply with the court’s ruling.119

In the case PROFEPA v Residencial Balvanera120, a developer filed an environmental impact statement with SEMARNAT for its project in the State of Queretaro. Rather than wait for review of the statement and issuance of a permit, the developer proceeded with its project in violation of environmental law. PROFEPA issued a temporary suspension of the project, which the developer also disregarded. As a result, PROFEPA and SEMARNAT filed suit. The court ordered an injunction with a temporary attachment of the developer’s land plots and construction installations.121 After the parties settled, the court approved the settlement and issued a judgement confirming that the developer would:

  1. submit the project to SEMARNAT for approval,
  2. repair damages previously caused,
  3. contribute funds for reforestation and other remediation projects,
  4. make contributions to the Environmental Responsibility Fund and National Environmental Audit Program, and
  5. pay substantial fines.122

In another case, six children and teenagers from the Mayan Community of Homún, represented by their mothers, filed a collective lawsuit opposing the construction of a pig farm in the municipality of Yucatán.123 The judge ordered the immediate cessation of the activities of the farm based on three main points (a decision recently confirmed by the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice):124

  • i. The suspension of the project guaranteed the interest of society and preserved the right to a healthy environment, decent life, water and ecological balance. The fact that the water treatment plant was unfinished was considered an imminent environmental risk because water could be discharged without adequate treatment. Such discharge would affect particularly sensitive protected natural areas, such as the “Anillo de los Cenotes”, which is a geo-hydrological reserve.

  • ii. The risk of contamination of the groundwater of the Yucatan Peninsula had to be prevented in accordance with the principle of prevention and precaution in the face of scientific uncertainty.125 A failure to comply with that principle could trigger Mexico’s international responsibility.

  • iii. The permits and authorisations were granted to the farm without respecting the right of indigenous peoples to consultation and participation,126 as established by the UN Declaration on Indigenous Peoples, the ILO Convention 169, various judgements of the IACtHR, and Article 2 of the Constitution. In addition, the complainants were children, raising the best interests of the child as a relevant factor to grant suspension (emphasis added). The Governor of the State and the Secretary of Urban Development had a period of three days to report on the acts they had carried out to comply with the judgement, failing which they would be subject to administrative and even criminal sanctions, in addition to respective fines.

Local media reported that the children involved in this case were threatened during the proceedings.127

C. Are there any administrative authorities empowered to act on environmental complaints and if so, how are they empowered to respond to complaints?

SEMARNAT offers an online platform through which any interested party can file a complaint against individuals or public servants affiliated with SEMARNAT and its decentralised bodies in relation to their discharge of duties and responsibilities.128

PROFEPA is a decentralised administrative body of the SEMARNAT with technical and operational autonomy.129 It has the power to monitor compliance with legal provisions, safeguard the interests of the population in environmental matters, seek compliance with environmental legislation and sanction individuals and companies who violate these legal provisions.130

Further, the CNDH is also a fully autonomous governmental agency, whose mandate is to “protect, observe, promote, study, and disseminate the human rights protected by the Mexican legal system.”131 The CNDH can receive and investigate complaints on human rights violations and make recommendations on its findings to the government, including outlining corrective actions. It can also assist government agencies to comply with international human rights obligations.

The CNDH issued a number of recommendations related to environmental protection even before the right to a healthy environment was included in the Mexican Constitution in 2012. For example, in its Recommendation No. 12/2010, the CNDH found that the National Water Commission (“CONAGUA”) failed to comply with environmental standards that required it to treat and clean up polluted water in the Santiago River and that this failure caused the death of a child and affected the health of people living in the vicinity of the river. The CNDH also recommended that the CONAGUA warn residents of the risk to their health from pollution, enact effective environmental protection guidelines, and take steps to clean up and restore the affected areas.132

In its Recommendation No. 54/2011, the CNDH found that the untreated wastewater being released into the Usumacinta River violated, among other things, the rights to an adequate environment and drinking water of the inhabitants in the area.133 In its Recommendation No. 56/2019, the CNDH confirmed that untreated wastewater discharged into the Atoyac River violated the right to a healthy environment. It recommended that the SEMARNAT, the CONAGUA, and the relevant State and municipal governments jointly design a strategic action plan and a comprehensive ecological restoration or sanitation program for the Atoyac River.134

CONAGUA’s mission is to preserve national waters and their inherent public goods for their sustainable administration and to guarantee water security for the population.135 The CNDH can make recommendations as to CONAGUA’s compliance with domestic and international environmental obligations. In its recommendation No. 31/2019, the CNDH noticed that CONAGUA committed several irregularities in the granting, validity and extension of a national waters concession in the town of San Nicolas Tenexcalco and recommended that CONAGUA fully repair the damage to the private property of four citizens.136

For its part, the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (“CONABIO”) is an inter-ministerial commission of the Mexican government, whose mission is to promote, coordinate, support and carry out activities and projects designed to foment understanding of biodiversity within Mexico.137 CONABIO was conceived as an applied research organisation that compiles, generates, and publishes information on biodiversity for public access.

Finally, the National Institute of Ecology and Climate Change (“INECC”) is an autonomous and decentralised public body of the Mexican government in charge of formulating, conducting and evaluating national policy on ecological balance.138 On 30 April 2020, the SEMARNAT and INECC invited thirty Mexican States to discuss strategies to mitigate climate change.139

 
 

IV. Civil and political rights

Freedom of peaceful assembly

A. How is children’s right to engage in peaceful assembly, including protests, protected in national law?

National constitution

At the national level, Article 9 of the Constitution guarantees the right of peaceful assembly for all persons; there is no distinction between children and adults.140 Article 75 of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents specifically protects children and adolescents’ right to the freedom of peaceful assembly. In Mexico, children are defined as those under the age of 12. Adolescents are between 12 and 18 years of age.141 The criminal age is 12, meaning that children below the age of 12 are presumed not to be subject to any such criminal sanctions in the certain States and municipalities that have introduced limits to the general right to peaceful assembly (see below).

International human rights conventions

Mexico is a State party to the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the “ICCPR”).142 Article 21 of the ICCPR governs the right of peaceful assembly and does not discriminate between children and adults.143

However, human rights bodies such as CIVICUS and Amnesty International have previously reported that Municipalities and States within Mexico apply their own regulations and administrative procedures, often including notification requirements. Moreover, Amnesty International has documented local legislative initiatives that aim to limit the right to peaceful assembly. In the state of Tabasco, for example, public demonstrations were criminalised in 2019. Amnesty International further reports that since 2016, the Federal government has used this type of offence to criminalise peaceful protesters opposing a Federal Electricity Commission (CFE) project in Cuetzalan in the State of Puebla. The CFE is currently using such criminal charges to try to force the community to accept a public project.

Child-specific conventions

Mexico acceded to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on 21 September 1990 (the “CRC”).144 The CRC sets out child-specific versions of existing rights. Article 15 recognises the rights of the child to freedom of association (see below) and to freedom of peaceful assembly.

B. Are there any legal limitations on the right of children to engage in peaceful assemblies?

There are several legal limitations on the right of all persons to engage in peaceful assemblies set out in Article 9 of the Constitution:

  • (i) Only citizens of Mexico may take part in the political affairs of the country.
  • (ii) No armed meeting has the right to deliberate.
  • (iii) Meetings organised to make a petition or to submit a protest to any authority cannot be considered as unlawful, nor be broken, provided that no insults are uttered against the authority and no violence or threats are used to intimidate or force the decision of such authority.

The General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents cross-references the limitations to the right of peaceful assembly established in the Constitution.

The CRC states in Article 15 that no restrictions may be placed on the exercise of these rights other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

In practice, as noted above, certain States and Municipalities restrict the right by introducing criminal sanctions for protesters for actions that do not necessarily fit within the legislative ‘breaches’ identified above. A number of States have laws/proposed laws that restrict and/or criminalise public demonstrations including, Aguascalientes, Chiapas, Coahuila, Ciudad de México, Michoacán, Nuevo León, Puebla, Quintana Roo and Tabasco. Often, these types of laws prominently target environmental defenders.145

In the State of Guerrero, the Commission on the Rights of Children and Adolescents is analysing a legal initiative to prohibit the use of children in marches, rallies, acts of protest and demonstrations of a partisan, trade union, political, social or any other kind that could put their physical integrity at risk.146 There are other proposed laws to limit the right to demonstrate in States such as San Luís Potosí or Veracruz.

C. What penalties can be imposed on children for engaging in school strikes?

Children over the age of 12 (considered ‘adolescents’ in Mexico) could be subject to criminal sanctions for breach of the limitations to the right to peaceful assembly identified in Article 9 of the Constitution and/or for breach of the local laws that restrict public demonstrations in the abovementioned States, to the extent that any such breaches are considered criminal offences (e.g. criminal association).147

However, in terms of the National Law on the Comprehensive Criminal Justice System for Adolescents (the “Adolescent Criminal Justice Law” or ACJL), imprisonment of adolescents is a last resort sanction, which can only be imposed in connection with specific crimes listed in such law (e.g. terrorism, rape and prohibited gun possession).148 None of the crimes included in the referred list are directly related with a breach of the limitations to the right to peaceful assembly.

Further, the ACJL creates categories of criminal sanctions based on age: children (i) over the age of 12 and under the age of 14 cannot be subject to imprisonment; (ii) over the age of 14 and under the age of 16 cannot be imprisoned for more than three years; and (iii) over the age of 16 and under the age of 18 cannot be imprisoned for more than five years.

Freedom of expression

A. How is children’s right to freedom of expression protected in national law? Are there any protections within the national constitution, legislation or developed through case law?

Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution provide a comprehensive and detailed protection for freedom of expression for all persons. Articles 64 to 70 of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents set out the specific rights of children and adolescents to freedom of expression.149

Internationally, Articles 12 and 13 of the CRC protect the child’s right to freedom of expression.150 Article 19(1) of the ICCPR guarantees the right to hold opinions without interference. Article 19(2) protects the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, through any media.151 In accordance with Article 19(3), any restriction imposed on this right must be provided by law and be necessary and proportionate to protect the rights or reputations of others, national security or public order, or public health and morals.

Mexico is also State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights,152 which guarantees freedom of expression, including the right to information (Article 13). Article 13(2) provides that freedom of expression “shall not be subject to prior censorship but shall be subject to subsequent imposition of liability”, which must be provided by law, pursue a legitimate aim and be necessary and proportionate to achieve that goal. Article 13(3) provides that “the right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions”.153

B. Are there any legal limits or restrictions on the right to freedom of expression that specifically apply to children?

There are no age limits on the right to freedom of expression. The General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents protects the right for all children under the age of 12 and all adolescents between the age of 12 and 18.154 The General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents does, however, cross-reference the limitations on the right to freedom of expression set out in Article 6 of the Constitution. These limits allow freedom of expression rights to be subject to judicial or administrative inquiry when such expression of ideas goes against the morals, privacy or rights of third parties, causes perpetration of a felony, or disturbs public order.

Freedom of association

A. How is children’s right to freedom of association protected in national law? Are there any protections within the national constitution, legislation or developed through case law?

Freedom of association is guaranteed by Article 9 of the Constitution, which also protects freedom of assembly. Article 75 of the Children’s Law protects children and adolescents’ right to freedom of association.155 Internationally, Article 22 of the ICCPR protects the universal right to freedom of association and Article 15 of the CRC protects children’s right to freedom of association.

In Mexico, children and adolescents have been part of effective community-based organisation, resistance and denunciation on environmental and health issues.156

B. Are there any legal limits or restrictions on the right to association that specifically apply to children?

The same constitutional limits of Article 9 apply, and the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents cross references these:

  • (i) Only citizens of Mexico may take part in the political affairs of the country.
  • (ii) No armed meeting has the right to deliberate.
  • (iii) Meetings organised to make a petition or to submit a protest to any authority cannot be considered as unlawful, nor be broken, provided that no insults are uttered against the authority and no violence or threats are used to intimidate or force the decision of such authority.

In practice, human rights organisations have raised concerns about the National Use of Force Law, fearing it may be used to suppress both political protest and free association.157

Access to information

A. How is children’s right to access information protected in national law? Are there any protections within the national constitution, legislation or developed through case law?

Article 6 of the Constitution protects the right to access to information for all persons. It obliges the State to guarantee access to information and communication technology, access to the services of radio broadcast, telecommunications and broadband internet. Additionally, Article 65 of the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents guarantees children and adolescents’ right to free access to information.

Internationally, Article 19 of the ICCPR states that everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression, which shall include the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds. Article 17 of the CRC requires State Parties to ensure that the child has access to information and material from a diversity of national and international sources, especially those aimed at the promotion of their social, spiritual and moral well-being, and physical and mental health.

B. Are there any legal limits or restrictions on the right to access information that apply specifically to children?

Social media platforms themselves tend to impose age limits on users but there is no specific legal limit or restriction under Mexican law regarding children’s right to access social media or online services. Additionally, the General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents enables parents or those who have the custody of a child, to supervise and restrict behaviours and habits of the children under their custody, provided that they act based upon the best interest of the child.158 Pursuant to this provision, parents and guardians of a child could restrict the child’s right to access information, to the extent they act based on the best interests of the child.

There are material barriers to the right to access information for children in areas which experience connectivity issues, especially for children from indigenous communities and children in rural and remote areas.159

C. Does the national curriculum for schools include environmental education?

Yes. According to a 2017 thesis on Conceptions of Environmental Education in Mexican Primary Education, environmental education has existed and evolved in the basic education curriculum of Mexico since 1993.160 In the 2011 Mexican basic education curriculum, environmental education is one of eleven cross-curricular themes embedded in multiple aims and statutory subjects.161 The 2013-2018 National Development Plan for Mexico indicated intentions to continue with the incorporation of sustainability criteria and environmental education in the National Education System and to strengthen environmental education in strategic sectors.162

Environmental education is not included as an independent topic in the primary-level national curriculum but environmental issues are strongly represented in natural and social science textbooks.163 The natural sciences program is organised according to the following goals:

  1. To relate the acquisition of knowledge about the natural world with the formation and practice of attitudes and scientific abilities;
  2. To associate scientific knowledge with its technical implications;
  3. To give special attention to environmental conservation and health; and
  4. To encourage the relationship between the apprenticeship of the natural sciences and the content of other subjects.164

Barraza references an in-depth study carried out by researchers on how many and which environmental problems were mentioned in the national textbooks, in which subjects and for what years. The textbooks mentioned the following environmental problems:

  1. erosion from natural causes;
  2. pollution; and
  3. extinction of species caused by socioeconomic factors, especially poverty and lack of education.165

The textbooks also contained the following secondary problems:

  1. loss of ecosystems;
  2. deforestation;
  3. lack of water;
  4. population growth;
  5. migration from the country to the cities;
  6. commercial distribution of some products;
  7. nonfulfillment of basic needs for the majority; and
  8. the high economic, social and environmental costs of maintaining big cities.

Formal education has its limitations for educating children about environmental issues; often, there is a gap between government documents and guidelines and teachers’ approaches in individual classrooms.166 Outside of formal education, there are several successful NGO initiatives in Mexico to teach children about environmental conservation. Some of these NGOs are also working with the Mexican governments to design a new environmental education law.167

***

End notes

1 Miguel Angel Cancino Aguilar, “El derecho ambiental en México. Evolución y situación actual” (Environmental rights in Mexico. Evolution and actual situation.) Alegatos 100, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Faculty of Law. Available at: http://alegatos.azc.uam.mx/index.php/ra/article/view/672.


2 Art. 1 Political Constitution of the United Mexican States [Constitution]. Available at: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mexico_2015.pdf.


3 Art. 4, Constitution.


4 Art. 25, Constitution.


5 Art. 27, Constitution.


6 Art. 27 XXIX-A, Constitution.


7 Miguel Carbonell, “Los Derechos Fundamentales en México”, 3ª Edición, Porrúa (2009), 912


8 Art 73 (X), Constitution.


9 Miguel Carbonell, “Los Derechos Fundamentales en México”, 3ª Edición, Porrúa (2009), 939.


10 Art. 4, Constitution.


11 Art. 4, Constitution.


12 Art. 104(II), Constitution.


13 Articles 2, 3, 6 and 18 Ley General de los Derechos de Niñas, Niños y Adolescentes (General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents). Available in Spanish at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/2022-08/Ley_GDNNA.pdf.


14 National Council to Prevent Discrimination, https://www.conapred.org.mx/index.php?contenido=pagina&id=127&id_opcion=45&op=45.


15 Art. 4, Ley de Amparo. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LAmp_150618.pdf


16 Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, “Grupo Mexico Lawsuit.” Available at: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/grupo-m%C3%A9xico-lawsuit-re-toxic-spill-in-mexico-2/


17 Ibid.


18 Cano López, Luis Miguel and Colín Olmos, María del Camrne, “El derecho humano a la participación medioambiental”, Sentencias Relevantes en Materia Ambiental, 1a. Ed., Editorial Porrúa, México, 2019, p. 23-25.


19 Federal Judicature Council, “Nota Informativa” (29 June 2017). Available at: https://www.cjf.gob.mx/documentos/notasInformativas/docsNotasInformativas/2017/notaInformativa42.pdf


20 García Villegas Sánchez Cordero, Paula María, “Derecho al medio ambiente sano; Caso línea 7 del Metrobús Reforma en la Ciudad de México”, Sentencias Relevantes en Materia Ambiental, 1a. Ed., Editorial Porrúa, México (2019), 41-53.


21 Loreta Ortíz Ahlf, “Derecho Internacional Público”, 3a. Ed., Oxford University Press, México, 2004, p. 647.


22 Jose Maria Serna de la Garza, “The Concept Of Jurisprudencia In Mexican Law” Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).


23 Avante Juárez, Selina Haidé, “Caso malecón Tajamar”, Sentencias Relevantes en Materia Ambiental, 1a. Ed., Editorial Porrúa, México, (2019) 111.


24 Ibid.


25 Tesis XXVII.3o.15 CS (10a.) Medio Ambiente Sano. Principios Aplicables A Su Protección, Constitucionalmente Reconocida., Tribunales Colegiados del Circuito (Collegiate Circuit Courts), Federal Judicial Weekly Gazette Book 55, Volume IV 3092 (June 2018). Available at: https://sjf.scjn.gob.mx/SJFSist/Paginas/DetalleGeneralV2.aspx?Epoca=1e3e10000000000&Apendice=1000000000000&Expresion=%2522equidad%2520intergeneracional%2522&Dominio=Rubro,Texto&TA_TJ=2&Orden=1&Clase=DetalleTesisBL&NumTE=1&Epp=20&Desde=-100&Hasta=-100&Index=0&InstanciasSeleccionadas=6,1,2,50,7&ID=2017254&Hit=1&IDs=2017254&tipoTesis=&Semanario=0&tabla=&Referencia=&Tema=


26 Recomendación No. 134 /2022 sobre el caso de las violaciones a los derechos humanos a un medio ambiente sano, al agua y al saneamiento, a la salud y al principio del interés superior de la niñez, derivado de la contaminación en el río Santiago, en el Estado de Jalisco, 30 June 2022. Available in Spanish at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/2022-07/REC_2022_134.pdf. A Recommendation is a public statement that expresses the final result of an investigation carried out by the National Human Rights Commission, addressed to the responsible authority in which the veracity and existence of documented conducts considered to be in violation of human rights is expressed. The Recommendation contains a series of guidelines, the fundamental purpose of which is to urge the responsible authority to provide the necessary actions and carry out the reparation and redress of the damages caused. The CNDH's Recommendations are not binding on other governmental entities.


27 Ibid. [306].


28 Ibid. [307].


29 Ibid. [308].


30 Carlos de Icaza, “Environmental law and practice in Mexico: Overview”, Thomson Reuters Practical Law (01 Jan. 2021). Available at: https://content.next.westlaw.com/7-508-8956.


31 See supra Section I.A.


32 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/148_050618.pdf.


33 Available at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=381e50d1-23bd-4feb-a6a9-c713c6b4215e.


34 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LFRA.pdf.


35 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/16_060120.pdf.


36 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/146_190118.pdf.


37 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/263_190118.pdf.


38 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGCC_130718.pdf.


39 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGDFS_130420.pdf.


40 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LVZMM.pdf.


41 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LANSI_110814.pdf.


42 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/142_240120.pdf.


43 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/9_240120.pdf.


44 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGDNNA_171019.pdf.


45 Ibid. Article 14.


46 Available at: https://www.global-regulation.com/translation/mexico/8197453/law-general-of-administrative-responsibilities.html.


47 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGDNNA_171019.pdf.


48 See the proposed draft bill here (in Spanish): http://sil.gobernacion.gob.mx/Archivos/Documentos/2018/04/asun_3692088_20180405_1522963610.pdf.


49 See, Senado de la República, Coordinación de Comunicación Social. Available at: http://comunicacion.senado.gob.mx/index.php/46-grupos-parlamentarios/boletin-de-prensa/28499-la-nueva-ley-de-aguas-nacionales-no-debe-dividir-a-los-mexicanos-senador-aaron-irizar.html


50 Fanny Miranda, “Con mural, exigen al Senado legislar a favor de océanos para reducir plásticos.” (07 June 2020). Available at: https://www.milenio.com/ciencia-y-salud/medioambiente/contaminacion-mural-pintado-frente-senado-favor-oceanos.


51 National Forest Commission (Comisión Nacional Forestal), “Iniciativa para reformar la Ley General de Desarrollo Forestal Sustentable”. Available at: https://www.gob.mx/conafor/documentos/iniciativa-para-reformar-la-ley-general-de-desarrollo-forestal-sustentable


52 See the chart published by the SINAICA, the Sistema Nacional de Información de la Calidad del Aire. Available at: https://sinaica.inecc.gob.mx/pags/noms.php


53 Government of Mexico, “100 compromisos del presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador”, (1st September 2020). Available at: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/580709/100_compromisos_1_de_septiembre_2020.pdf.


54 See, Secretariat of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP), Mexico’s expenditures budget, 2019, “Investment projects of PEMEX Exploration & Production,” https://www.ppef.hacienda.gob.mx/work/models/PPEF2019/docs/52/r52_t9g_pie.pdf.


55 Mexican Alliance Against Fracking, https://nofrackingmexico.org/.


56 Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, “Registro de Emisiones y Transferencia de Contaminantes.” Available at: https://www.gob.mx/semarnat/acciones-y-programas/registro-de-emisiones-y-transferencia-de-contaminantes-retc


57 SEMARNAT, “Pollutant Release and Transfer Register” PowerPoint”. Available at: http://www2.inecc.gob.mx/dgicur/sqre/descargas/07_mr_en.pdf


58 Ibid.


59 Red por los Derechos de la Infancia en México (REDIM) and Greenpeace México, No Apto para Pulmones Pequeños: Diagnóstico de calidad del aire y el derecho de niñas, niños y adolescentes al aire limpio (2018). Available at: https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-mexico-stateless/2018/11/e7381732-e7381732-no_apto_para_pulmones_pequen%CC%83osok3.pdf


60 Ibid.


61 There is some indication that Mexico may assert extra-territorial jurisdiction against cartels and other monopolistic economic practices, but these do not explicitly relate to the environment. See e.g. Santamarina y Steta, “Competition Authorities’ Jurisdiction in Extraterritorial Cartel Cases”, Lexology (19 June 2019). Available at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=952cd02b-fc91-49f0-8d18-03535a515059


62 USMCA Chapter 24: Environment. Available at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/IssueAreas/Environment/USMCA_Environment_Chapter_24.pdf


63 F. Ruanova Guinea, Chambers and Partners, “Environmental Law 2019 Second Edition”, (2019), Available at: https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/environmental-law-2019-second-edition/mexico.


64 E. Lees and J. E. Viñuales, “The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Environmental Law”, (2019), p. 292.


65 Art. 182, LGEEPA.


66 Environmental offences are listed in Articles 414-423 of the Federal Criminal Code.


67 Summary of Environmental Law in Mexico. Available at: https://moose.cec.org/moose/lawdatabase/mxdoc.cfm?varlan=english&topic=4.


68 Art. 189, LGEEPA.


69 PROFEPA has authority to, amongst other things, carry out inspection visits, prosecute non-compliance, apply sanctions and generally enforce environmental laws and regulations; see Creel, García-Cuéllar, Aiza y Enríquez, S.C., “Environmental Law and Practice in Mexico: Overview”, (2019), Thomson Reuters Practical Law, https://1.next.westlaw.com/7-508-8956?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&__lrTS=20180511141800925&firstPage=true&bhcp=1&isplcus=true (accessed 15 June 2020).


70 Art. 189, LGEEPA.


71 Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental, “Mecanismos nacionales para la protección del derecho a un medio ambiente sano” A.C. (Cemda), p. 59.


72 L. Esparza Romero, “Mexico: Environment & Climate Change Law 2020”, (2020). Available at: https://iclg.com/practice-areas/environment-and-climate-change-laws-and-regulations/mexico


73 Art. 176-181, LGEEPA.


74 See section II.B. regarding the standing required to bring an amparo action.


75 E. Lees and J. E. Viñuales, The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Environmental Law, (2019).


76 CNDH, Frequently Asked Questions. Available at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/cndh/preguntas-frecuentes.


77 Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Articles 31-32. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/mandate/basics/rulesiachr.asp (accessed 18 June 2020)


78 Situation of Human Rights in Mexico Country Report, OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 44/15 (31 Dec 2015). Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/mexico2016-en.pdf


79 Resolution 7/2020, Inhabitants of the areas near the Santiago River regarding Mexico (7 February 2020). Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/decisions/pdf/2020/7-20MC708-19-ME.pdf


80 Ibid. 1-3


81 See discussion about the administrative avenue for recourse under Section II.A.


82 Art. 28, Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LFRA.pdf.


83 According to Art. 28 of the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility, these non-profits must have been incorporated at least three years prior to filing the corresponding lawsuit. However, the first chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice interpreted this requirement to be unconstitutional in a non-binding precedent. See: https://sjf.scjn.gob.mx/SJFSist/paginas/DetalleGeneralV2.aspx?ID=2009020&Clase=DetalleTesisBL&Semanario=0


84 Class actions cannot be exercised at a State or Municipal level, even though environmental protection is concurrently regulated at all three levels of government (i.e. federal, local and municipal).


85 Art. 54, Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LFRA.pdf


86 Article 8 (XVIII), Ley Federal de Responsabilidades Administrativas de los Servidores Públicos (Federal Law on Administrative Responsibilities of Public Servants), https://www.oas.org/juridico/spanish/mesicic3_mex_anexo5.pdf.


87 Art. 5, Ley de Amparo. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LAmp_150618.pdf (accessed 18 June 2020).


88 Indirect amparo, file 1726/2013, Fourth District Court in Tabasco (10 March 2017).


89 Avante Juárez, Selina Haidé, “Caso malecón Tajamar”, p. 113 - 114.


90 Ibid.


91 Article 106, Ley General de los Derechos de Niñas, Niños y Adolescentes (General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents), https://www.gob.mx/sipinna/documentos/ley-general-de-los-derechos-de-ninas-ninos-y-adolescentes-reformada-20-junio-2018#:~:text=%C3%9Altima%20reforma%20publicada%20en%20el%20DOF%2023%20de%20marzo%20de%202022&text=Tiene%20por%20objeto%2C%20entre%20otros,lo%20establecido%20en%20la%20Constituci%C3%B3n.


92 Article 450 of the Federal Civil Code. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/2_270320.pdf.


93 Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGDNNA_171019.pdf.


94 Art. 8 of the Federal Law on amparo proceedings. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LAmp_150618.pdf


95 Art. 80, Federal Law on amparo proceedings.


96 Art. 11, Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility.


97 Art. 12, Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility.


98 J. I. Aguilar Torres, “La Responsabilidad Civil Objetiva por Daños al Medio Ambiente y su Regulación en México”, (2010), Red de Investigadores Parlamentarios en Línea. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/sedia/sia/redipal/redipal-02-10.pdf


99 Sentencia Amparo 307-2016-181107. Available at: https://www.scjn.gob.mx/sites/default/files/listas/documento_dos/2018-11/AR-307-2016-181107.pdf


100 Available at: https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/43583/1/S1800428_en.pdf


101 Art. 29, Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility.


102 Art. 17 I-IV of the Federal Law on amparo proceedings.


103 Art. 17 of the Federal Law on amparo proceedings.


104 Art. 26 of the National Human Rights Commission Act. Available at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/all/doc/normatividad/Ley_CNDH.pdf.


105 Art. 31-32, Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Available at: https://www.oas.org/xxxivga/english/reference_docs/Reglamento_CIDH.pdf.


106 Article 15 of the Federal Law of Public Defence. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/106_010519.pdf.


107 Fundación Barra Mexico (Bar Foundation Mexico). Available at: https://fbma.org.mx/la-fundacion/#:~:text=La%20FBM%20es%20una%20asociaci%C3%B3n,pruebas%20periciales%20y%20transportaci%C3%B3n%20for%C3%A1nea.


108 Latham & Watkins for the Pro Bono Institute, “Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in Mexico”, (2010). Available at: http://www.probonoinst.org/wpps/wp-content/uploads/mexico.pdf.


109 Art. 1915 of the Federal Civil Code. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/2_270320.pdf


110 Art. 1916 of the Federal Civil Code.


111 Art. 1932 of the Federal Civil Code.


112 F. Ruanova Guinea (2019), Chambers and Partners, “Environmental Law” 2019 Second Edition. Available at: https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/environmental-law-2019-second-edition/mexico


113 Art. 421 of the Federal Criminal Code. Latest version available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/9_240120.pdf.


114 Art. 4 of the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility.


115 Art. 11, 19 of the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility. Article 19 of the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility provides that the economic sanction can range from three hundred to fifty thousand days of the general minimum wage, if the responsible person is a natural person, or from one thousand to six hundred thousand days of the general minimum wage, if the responsible person is a legal entity.


116 Art. 70, Federal Law on Administrative Proceedings. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/112_180518.pdf


117 Art. 52, Federal Law on Contentious Administrative Proceedings.


118 Art. 77-78, Federal Law on amparo proceedings. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LAmp_150618.pdf.


119 Sentencia Amparo-307-2016-181107. Available at: https://www.scjn.gob.mx/sites/default/files/listas/documento_dos/2018-11/AR-307-2016-181107.pdf


120 PROFEPA v. Residencial Balvanera, SA de CV (2017). Judgement available at: https://goo.gl/azhDdX


121 In the meantime, PROFEPA and the developer engaged in alternative dispute resolution mechanisms provided for in the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility.


122 Sentencia Judicial de Responsabilidad Ambiental Resuelve Controversia por Cambio de Uso de Suelo Forestal de Empresa Balvanera en Qro. Available at: https://www.gob.mx/profepa/prensa/primer-sentencia-judicial-de-responsabilidad-ambiental-resuelve-controversia-porcambio-de-uso-de-suelo-forestal-de-empresa-residencial-balvanera-en-queretaro.


123 Ordena jueza federal la paralización de la megagranja porcícola en Yucatán (12 October 2018). Available at: https://m.aristeguinoticias.com/1210/mexico/ordena-jueza-federal-la-paralizacion-de-la-megagranja-porcicola-en-yucatan/; https://www.proceso.com.mx/554970/juez-otorga-suspension-contra-granja-porcicola-en-homun-yucatan.


124 “Mexican Supreme Court Ruled in Favour of Mayan Community, Suspends 49,000 Hog Farm”, Earthjustice (20 May 2021). Available at: https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2021/mexican-supreme-court-ruled-in-favor-of-mayan-community-suspends-49-000-hog-farm


125 See supra Section II.D p. 17.


126 This right requires consultations in good faith with indigenous communities in order to reach agreements or obtain their consent on determinations that affect them.


127 See, for example, “Amenazan a guardiana de cenotes de Homún que lucha contra mega granja porcícola” (EDUCA Servicios para una Educación Alternativa, 2022), https://www.educaoaxaca.org/amenazan-a-guardiana-de-cenotes-de-homun-que-lucha-contra-mega-granja-porcicola/; Sare Frabes, “Amenazan infancia que defiende los cenotes en Homún”, (Avispa, 2022), https://avispa.org/amenazan-a-infancia-que-defiende-los-cenotes-en-homun/; Fanny Miranda, “Acusan amenazas contra defensora de cenotes y opositora a granjas porcícolas en Yucatán”, (Milenio, 2022), https://www.milenio.com/politica/amenazan-defensora-cenotes-opositora-granjas-porcicolas; Raúl Durán, “Una defensora de Homún recibió amenazas contra ella y sus hijos por oponerse a una mega granja de cerdos” (Debate, 2022), https://www.debate.com.mx/estados/Amenazan-a-defensora-de-cenotes-de-Homun-y-a-sus-hijos-en-Yucatan-20220406-0227.html.


128 Available at: https://sidec.funcionpublica.gob.mx/#!/home#top


129 More information on the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection available at: www.profepa.gob.mx


130 As mentioned above, pursuant to Article 189 of the LGEEPA, every person, social groups, NGOs, associations and communities can file a complaint with PROFEPA. If the investigations show that the acts or omissions complained of were carried out by Federal, State or Municipal Authorities, PROFEPA will issue non-binding recommendations to be followed before the execution of the pertinent actions. Finally, the PROFEPA has the authority to initiate the appropriate proceedings, when it knows of acts, facts or omissions that constitute violations of administrative or criminal legislation (Article 202 of the LGEEPA).


131 More information on the National Human Rights Commission available at: http://www.cndh.org.mx/ (accessed on 4 June 2020).


132 Available at: http://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/all/doc/Recomendaciones/2010/Rec_2010_012.pdf


133 Available at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/default/files/doc/Recomendaciones/2011/REC_2011_054.pdf


134 Available at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/2019-09/Rec-2019-56.pdf


135 More information on the National Water Commission available at: https://www.gob.mx/conagua


136 Available at: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/2019-06/REC_2019_31.pdf


137 More information on the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity available at: https://www.gob.mx/conabio.


138 More information on the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity available at: https://www.gob.mx/inecc. In the period 2013-2018, INECC researched and investigated the following topics: i) pollution and environmental health, ii) green growth, iii) adaptation to climate change, iv) mitigation of climate change and v) evaluation of the climate change policy. Available at: https://www.gob.mx/inecc/acciones-y-programas/estudios-y-asesorias-_esquema_2.


139 INECC, “Gobiernos Estatales participan en el diálogo para definir las Contribuciones Determinadas a nivel Nacional”, (State governments participate in a dialogue to define national contributions). Available at: https://www.gob.mx/inecc/prensa/semarnat-e-inecc-convocan-a-los-estados-al-dialogo-para-definir-las-contribuciones-nacionalmente-determinadas.


140 Art. 9, Constitution. See, a non-official English translation of the Constitution with amendments through 2015. Available at: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Mexico_2015.pdf?lang=en


141 International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, National Child Protection Legislation Mexico (October 2018). Available at: https://www.icmec.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/ICMEC-Mexico-National-Legislation.pdf.


142 OHCHR Status of Ratification Dashboard. Available at: https://indicators.ohchr.org/.


143 Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx


144 supra n. 125.


145 Michelle Carrere, Vanessa Romo, “Mordaza legal: al menos 156 defensores ambientales demandados por proteger su territorio en cuatro países de Latinoamérica”, (Mongabay, 2021). Available at: https://es.mongabay.com/2021/05/mordaza-legal-al-menos-156-defensores-ambientales-demandados-por-proteger-su-territorio/.


146 “Analizan iniciativa para prohibir utilización de menores en protestas” (Quadratin Guerrero, 2022). Available at: https://guerrero.quadratin.com.mx/analizan-iniciativa-para-prohibir-utilizacion-de-menores-en-protestas/.


147 Article 1 of the National Law on the Comprehensive Criminal Justice System for Adolescents (Ley Nacional del Sistema Integral de Justicia Penal para Adolescentes). Available at: https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LNSIJPA.pdf. The offence of criminal association is regulated in Article 164 of the Federal Criminal Code.


148 Art. 164 of the National Law on the Comprehensive Criminal Justice System for Adolescents. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LNSIJPA.pdf.


149 Available at: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/317422/LGDNNA_ed_Senado.pdf.


150 Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx.


151 Available at: https://www.oas.org/en/iachr/expression/docs/2018_06_18_CIDH-UN_FINAL_MX_report_ENG.pdf


152 Available at: https://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_B-32_American_Convention_on_Human_Rights_sign.htm.


153 Available at: https://www.oas.org/en/iachr/expression/docs/2018_06_18_CIDH-UN_FINAL_MX_report_ENG.pdf.


154 Art. 5, General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents.


155 ICCPR, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx.


156 Some recent examples include the ones in the State of Jalisco in relation to the contamination of the Santiago River and the Zapotillo Dam (both supported by the Mexican Institute for Community Development, IMDEC) with the involvement of the community committee "Save Temacapulín" (“Salvemos Temacapulín”); the case of the guardians of the Cenotes in Homún (where Mayan children played a leading role); the case regarding the contamination of the air and water of Sitilpech and Chapab, in Yucatán; and the one on the contamination of the Atoyac River, with the involvement of the committee "For an Atoyac with Life" (“Por un Atoyac con Vida”).


157 Freedom House, Freedom in the World Reports, Mexico (2020). Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/country/mexico/freedom-world/2020.


158 Art. 76, General Law on the Rights of Children and Adolescents.


159 “Acceso a internet en la infancia y adolescencia de México” (2020), Blog de datos e incidencia política de REDIM (2022). Available at: https://blog.derechosinfancia.org.mx/2022/02/14/acceso-a-internet-en-la-infancia-y-adolescencia-de-mexico/.


160 Ana Ilse Benavides Lahnstein, “Conceptions of Environmental Education in Mexican Primary Education: Teachers’ Views and Curriculum Aims”, University of Leeds (Doctoral Thesis) (2017). Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/156963672.pdf.


161 Ibid.


162 Ibid.


163 Laura Barraza, “Environmental Education in Mexican Schools: The Primary Level”, published in the Journal of Environment Education, 2001, Vol. 32 No. 3 31-36. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249038548_Environmental_Education_in_Mexican_Schools_The_Primary_Level.


164 Ibid.


165 Ibid.


166 Ana Ilse Benavides Lahnstein, “Conceptions of Environmental Education in Mexican Primary Education: Teachers’ Views and Curriculum Aims”, University of Leeds (Doctoral Thesis) (2017).


167 Magdalena Rojo, “Mexico - A Leader in Environmental Education” (2019). Available at: https://www.fairplanet.org/editors-pick/mexico-a-leader-in-environmental-education/