Skip to content

2011 Constitutional reforms in relation to human rights treaties

In 2011, after many years of campaigns for clearer constitutional protection of international human rights norms, reforms to Article 1 of the Constitution were enacted. These recognised the constitutional status of international human rights treaties and required laws relating to human rights to be interpreted in conformity with the constitution and human rights treaties, applying in every case the pro personae principle, that is that principle that provides greatest protection to the person. The reform also required all authorities in their jurisdictions to promote, respect, protect and guarantee human rights in line with the principles of universality, interdependence, indivisibility and progressivity.

In subsequent jurisprudence interpreting these constitutional reforms, the National Supreme Court (SCJN) established that the Constitution and international human rights treaties constitute the parameters of control for regulating the constitution, but when there is an explicit restriction of these in the Constitution, the Constitutional text applies (Bailón, 2019: 74). It also recognised the binding obligation on the Mexican authorities to comply with the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

The 2011 constitutional human rights reforms and subsequent jurisprudence of the SCJN strengthened the rights of indigenous peoples by applying in domestic law protections enshrined in, amongst other human right treaties, the American Convention on Human Rights, the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 169 of the International Labour Organisation, the UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the UN Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural rights. This increased constitutional protection of Mexico’s treaty obligations, subsequently served in the legal arguments to protect the rights of the indigenous community of San Miguel del Progreso in their case against the Corazón de Tinieblas mining concession.

Type of Action / Tipo de Acción:
National Legislative Activities and Procedures
Extractive Project / Proyecto extractivo:
Region / Región:
Mexico
Country / País:
Mexico
Natural Resource / Recurso natural:
Gold, Silver
Jurisdiction / Jurisdicción:
Mexican System
Category of Key Actors in Legal Action / Categoría de actores claves en la Acción Legal:
Politicians and/or Political Parties, State Institutions, Civil Society Organizations, International Organizations
Key Legal Actors Involved / Actores jurídicos clave involucrados:
Congress of Mexico, Mexican Human Rights Organizations, Centre for Human Rights of La Montaña Tlachinollan (CDHM Tlachinollan), National Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico (SCJN)
Year Action Started / Año de inicio:
2011
References / Referencias:

Moisés Jaime Bailón Corres, “Derechos Indígenas en México 2001-2019 – Algunas consideraciones sobre la evolución de las resoluciones del Poder Judicial de la Federación”, Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos, dated 2019, online: https://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/2019-09/Derechos-Indigenas-Mexico-2001-2019.pdf, accessed 24 June 2021.