By Arturo Flores Lopez
For Mexico, the year 2023 turned out to be historic in its trade relationship with the United States, since for the first time it surpassed China as the main export partner to the American nation. These good results have been accompanied by incentives offered by the government of our country, as reflected in the decree pro-nearshoring Published on October 11, 2023. It is in this context that it is worth asking whether the judicial reform proposal currently being promoted would not put such good economic results under threat.
It is clear that a reform to the judiciary is necessary, however, the way in which it has been presented (despite the different forums that were held) has perhaps not been the best. One of the voices that resounded loudest within the proposal for reform to the judiciary was that of the United States ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, who said that “if the elections of judges in 2025 and 2027 were approved, they threaten to end the process of reforming the judiciary.” the historic business relationship we have built, “which relationship depends on trust, on the investments that have to be made here in Mexico to achieve prosperity for the people of Mexico.”
The concern of Mexico’s main trading partner is based on what is expressed in an article of the renegotiated trade agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada during the Trump administration. The concern exists about the possibility of not being able to have access to full justice, since according to article 14.6 of the T-MEC, the minimum level of treatment consists of, where each Party shall accord to covered investments treatment consistent with customary international law, including fair and equitable treatment and full protection and securityThe problem highlighted by Salazar is a clear example of the implications that regional integration has for countries. Although the Mexican government staunchly defends its sovereignty, arguing that the United States cannot have an opinion on internal matters in Mexico, it is also true that it is our country’s main trading partner and that many of its investments could be affected by a reform to the judicial system that does not consider the points expressed in the aforementioned trade agreement.
This case shows that local matters now more than ever have a global impact; that is, currently nations in most regions of the planet are inexorably linked to respecting extra-territorial legal frameworks that oblige them to implement policies that safeguard labor, environmental and commercial issues. Therefore, it will be crucial to see the direction that judicial reform takes in our country, since business with our northern neighbor could be affected by local legal determinations that would inevitably have a regional and international scope.
Coordinator of the Anáhuac Center for Research in International Relations (X: @arturofl)