The initiatives to eliminate seven autonomous bodies and regulatory agencies go against the principles of the USMCA. The main concern of our trade partners focuses on the election by popular vote of judges.
Instead of Mexico striving to provide the regulatory certainty and rule of law that investors, both domestic and foreign, have requested for years, they are discussing the possibility of eliminating autonomous bodies, modifying the fundamental configuration of the Powers, and lowering the professionalism of judges and magistrates, warned Mariano Calderón, an expert in constitutional disputes from the law firm Santamaría y Steta.
“If we suddenly intend to change all the rules and do not provide certainty about who will be the arbiter to resolve disputes in specialized technical sectors, what we generate is insecurity and a sense of helplessness about the rules that may govern an investment,” he said.
According to the expert, the initiatives to eliminate seven autonomous bodies and regulatory agencies (which advanced in the Lower House Commission) go against the principles of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
“In the current USMCA, it is foreseen that there must be an autonomous, independent, professional, and technically specialized authority in charge of attacking and preventing monopolies,” he said.
The expert acknowledged that there is no way to make forecasts or take historical references about the impact that the eventual disappearance of these bodies will have.
“Adjustments would have to be made to the legal framework of each entity that will absorb the responsibilities and functions previously assigned to the bodies. And we would have to see what the reaction of the partner governments and the new presidency that will enter the United States will be to determine if they consider that the modification violates the USMCA and determine the measure of each government. Whether to initiate consultations or seek the installation of panels to resolve disputes, or in the worst case, in 2026, the application of the treaty’s validity clause and one of the governments may decide that it does not want to continue in it.”
Judicial reform, another risk According to the expert in constitutional disputes, voting for those who administer justice generates great uncertainty and concern in all sectors, as it undermines the autonomy, independence, impartiality, and capacity of judges.
The discussion on the judicial reform initiative does not address the improvement of prosecutors’ offices, investigative police, administrative authorities, nor the co-responsibility that the Legislative Power does have in issuing unconstitutional laws. Nor does it strive to improve the professionalism of those who administer justice. These are issues that are not part of the initiative.
“The main concern of our trade partners focuses on the election by popular vote of judges, which loses filters of professional capacity, quality, studies, a judicial career, a vocation,” the specialist specified.
Likewise, he opined that the filters of capacity, quality, professional experience, studies, vocation, and judicial career are lost, and it is encouraged that they can be placed by virtue of cronyism or legal affinity or closeness with real factors of political, economic, or in the worst case, criminal power.
Obstacle to growth Every month, the Bank of Mexico publishes the results of the survey of private sector specialists, where it is observed that a quarter of the experts consulted identify the lack of rule of law and crime as the main obstacles that companies in the country face to do business.
According to the most recent survey, published at the beginning of the month, 27% of 40 groups of economic analysis and consulting from the private sector, both national and foreign, identify the rule of law as the main obstacle to growth.
This proportion of experts highlighting this variable has not changed since July 2022.
Investment strategists referred by the consultancy FocusEconomics emphasize that uncertainty about constitutional reforms and specifically the judicial reform may already be hindering investment.
Source: El Econimista
