Verificado
¿Qué dice la iniciativa de Ley de Amparo que presentó Claudia Sheinbaum?
La presidenta Claudia Sheinbaum envió al Senado una iniciativa de reforma a la Ley de Amparo que contempla añadir una definición al concepto de "inte…
171
7k
1k
42k
Legal Experts Warn: Proposed Amparo Law Reform Threatens Environmental and Human Rights in Mexico
Mexico City, September 20, 2025 - A proposed reform to Mexico's Amparo Law is raising significant concerns among legal experts and civil society. Lawyer Carla Escoffié has highlighted how the new definition of 'legitimate interest' within the reform could severely impact citizens' ability to seek justice, especially in cases concerning environmental protection, urban development, and public spaces. Escoffié explains that while the concept of 'legitimate interest' is not new, having been established through judicial precedents, its codification in the Amparo Law is problematic. 'This definition obstructs access to amparo in cases of environment, city, public spaces and similar,' she states. She argues that the current interpretation is already highly restrictive, demanding that individuals demonstrate a 'differentiated' and 'direct' personal impact rather than a collective one. This individualistic approach makes it exceedingly difficult for communities and organizations to challenge actions that harm public goods. The lawyer emphasized that the reform is not targeting cases involving 'Salinas Priego or corrupt politicians escaping justice or businesses,' but rather 'amparos that neighbors, collectives, and organizations in different cities can present against, for example, works that deforest public spaces, privatize public spaces, generate some type of environmental impact in a natural protected area, or privatize conservation lands or protected areas.' Escoffié suggests three potential solutions: eliminating the figures of 'legitimate' and 'legal' interest entirely, removing the specific definition from the current initiative, or modifying it through an open, plural, and debated dialogue. She concluded by stating, 'The tools of the State will always serve the State, that is a fact,' and urged citizens to seek further information to form their own opinions on the matter, as the reform is not yet approved.
