MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Alejandro Mendiola Diaz, Pedro Isaac Alcalá Berhouague and Benjamín Uriel Salinas Morales, Nader, Hayaux & Goebel
Law provides no protection or incentives for indi - viduals who report cartel conduct without being participants. However, limited protections exist under anti- corruption laws for whistle-blowers in public procurement cases involving bid rigging. In the competition context, only cartel participants may benefit from the Leniency Programme, which is not a whistle-blower mechanism in the strict sense. 4. Procedural Framework for Cartel Enforcement 4.1 Obtaining Evidence From Employees The competition authority may request infor - mation or testimony directly from current and former employees, regardless of seniority. This occurs through written requests or summons for interviews. Each request must specify whether the person is contacted as a suspect or third party. Statements are documented and may be used as evidence. Individuals retain the right not to self-incriminate if their involvement is under review. 4.2 Obtaining Documentary Evidence From Subject/Target Companies COFECE and IFT are authorised to request documentary evidence directly from companies under investigation. This is typically done through formal written requests, which must specify whether the recipi - ent is a target or a third party. The recipient must respond within ten business days, with the pos - sibility of a single ten-day extension upon justi - fied request.
Authorities may issue multiple requests during the investigation. These often require extensive documentation, such as internal emails, con - tracts, pricing records, meeting minutes, and market data. Failure to comply may result in daily fines until the information is delivered. Authorities may also reiterate the request or apply additional enforce - ment measures, such as dawn raids. There are no limitations on the type of docu - ments that may be requested, except those pro - tected by attorney–client privilege, which must be claimed and justified separately. 4.3 Obtaining Evidence From Entities Outside the Jurisdiction Mexican competition authorities can request evidence from companies or individuals abroad, especially in cross-border cartel cases, but depend on co-operation agreements for enforcement. Entities in Mexico must produce documents or data stored overseas, includ - ing on cloud platforms, if they have control or access. The use of cloud storage does not limit the authority’s power to request information. Non-compliance may result in daily fines and other enforcement measures. 4.4 Domestic Inter-Agency Co-Operation Co-operation among public agencies is a key element of cartel enforcement in Mexico. Com - petition agencies maintain formal agreements with entities such as: • the Mexican Central Bank (Banxico); • the Ministry of Economy (SE); • the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP); • the National Banking and Securities Commis - sion (CNBV);
211 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook