MEXICO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Fernando García Gómez, Francisco de Rosenzweig, Yuriria Galicia and Diego Mora-Jensen, White & Case, S.C.
General Litigation in Mexico: An Introduction Mexico is undergoing the most far-reaching judicial transformation in over a century. Between 2024 and 2025, three major reforms have redefined the coun- try’s litigation framework: • a constitutional reform of the judiciary, altering the method of appointing judges and justices; • comprehensive amendments to the Amparo Law – Mexico’s cornerstone mechanism for constitutional protection; and • the entry into force and implementation of the National Code of Civil and Family Procedure (CNPCF) in Mexico City, establishing a unified pro- cedural regime across the country. Taken together, these reforms pursue the stated objective of democratising justice, eliminating cor- ruption in the judiciary, modernising procedures and digitalising court operations. However, they have also raised serious concerns regarding judicial inde- pendence, access to constitutional remedies and the predictability of adjudication – concerns that extend beyond domestic actors to foreign investors protected under instruments such as the United States–Mexico– Canada Agreement (USMCA). The judicial reform of 2024 replaced the career-based appointment of judges and magistrates with popular elections, reduced the size of the Supreme Court, and created a new Disciplinary Tribunal elected by citizens. The 2024 amendment to the Amparo Law restricted the availability and effects of injunctions, while the 2025 legislative initiative further codifies limitations on legiti- mate interest and suspension of acts, and promotes the digitalisation of proceedings. Parallel changes to the Federal Fiscal Code reinforce restrictions by making the submission of constitutional appeals and suspen- sion in tax-related acts more burdensome. Finally, the CNPCF – already in partial force – marks the procedural counterpart to these institutional reforms: a shift towards oral and digital justice, replacing the long-standing plurality of state procedural codes. These amendments put in question Mexico’s judi- cial system, legal certainty and adequate checks and balances. While it is true that certain individuals
have abused the protections granted by the Amparo Law and the judiciary, the response by the Congress seems disproportionate and could affect access to justice and compromise the judiciary’s credibility. The effects of the judicial reforms remain to be seen but individuals and corporations are now looking to arbitration and alternative access to justice mecha- nisms as alternatives to avoid the judiciary. However, higher costs and enforcement complications do not make such alternatives viable for all cases. Judicial reform: a new paradigm for the Mexican judiciary In September 2024, a constitutional reform to the judiciary was enacted under President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. The amendment reshaped the Mexi- can constitutional system by redefining the compo- sition, appointment and internal organisation of the federal judiciary. Key features include the following. • The election by popular vote of all federal judges, magistrates and Supreme Court Justices, thereby abolishing the judicial career system that had histori- cally ensured professional progression based on merit. • Eligibility criteria are reduced to holding a law degree, achieving a minimum grade-point average of nine in relevant courses (civil, commercial or administrative law), and at least five years of legal practice. • Reduction of the Supreme Court from 11 to nine justices, and the abolition of its two specialised chambers, with all cases now to be decided in plenary session. • The creation of a Disciplinary Tribunal composed of five magistrates elected by popular vote, responsi- ble for the oversight of judges and for the enforce- ment of disciplinary measures. • Decentralisation of reform – state constitutions must be amended so that local judges and magis- trates are also elected by citizens. These measures were presented as a step towards greater transparency and democratic accountability. In practice, they replace institutional independence with a system vulnerable to political and electoral influence.
722 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook