The Amendment To The Amparo Law In Mexico

Over a two-week period, the Mexican Congress discussed and approved the reform to the Amparo Law, which was published on October 16 and entered into force the following day.

According to its stated purpose, the reform seeks to modernize the amparo proceeding and reduce procedural abuse to expedite the administration of justice. However, it introduces substantial changes, several of which raise serious concerns regarding their compatibility with the right of access to justice and with the amparo's constitutional nature as a mechanism for judicial review.

Among the main changes proposed to the Amparo Law, some of the noteworthy ones are:

1.- Restrictions on "legitimate interest" to initiate an amparo action.

• The most relevant modification is the narrowing of the concept of legitimate interest.
• The amendment redefines legitimate interest to require real, current, and differentiated harm, with a direct and certain benefit to the claimant. In other words, the claimant must now prove immediate and concrete harm, thereby limiting the admissibility of amparo claims filed in defense of collective or diffuse rights, such as those related to environmental protection, human rights, or consumer protection.
• This change shifts the amparo's focus on an individual remedy and restricts access to justice in cases where the challenged acts have collective or community-wide effects.

2.- Reduced scope for the suspension of administrative acts.

• The amendment also modifies the rules governing the stay of the contested act, one of the most crucial protective tools in amparo proceedings.
• Now, the grounds for denying stay are expanded, especially in matters deemed to involve national security, social interest, or public safety. For example, it will no longer be possible to suspend account freezes ordered by the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF) or acts related to money laundering, terrorism financing, unauthorized activities, or public debt.
• As a result, government acts that may cause serious or irreparable harm could continue to produce effects before the courts issue a ruling, weakening the preventive function of the amparo and its role in averting irreversible harm.

3.- Procedural timeline adjustments

• The amendment extends the period for judges to resolve amparo cases against acts of authority from 60 to 90 calendar days, empowers courts to dismiss frivolous recusals, and promotes mandatory use of electronic amparo proceedings, including digital filings, electronic notifications, online case files, and video-recorded hearings.

4.- Sanctions for authorities and enforcement of judgments

• The amendment introduces clearer penalties for public officials who fail to comply with judicial decisions, with the stated aim of strengthening compliance with amparo rulings.

5.- Retroactive Application of the Reform

• One of the main points of debate and criticism centered on the third transitory article, which establishes that the new Law will be applied retroactively by procedural stages, including to amparo proceedings initiated before the reform. This provision could represent a setback and a direct violation of the principle of non-retroactivity of the law enshrined in Article 14 of the Mexican Constitution, because, although it is true that the Amparo Law contains many procedural or adjectival provisions, it is, in essence, a rights-protective statute both in substance and form. Therefore, the line between what constitutes a procedural matter and what involves substantive rights is extremely thin, making its application highly complex from a technical standpoint.
• While technological modernization, the intent to expedite and stronger enforcement mechanisms may be seen as positive developments, the restrictions on legitimate interest and on stays significantly diminish the scope of the amparo as the most important legal safeguard available to citizens in Mexico against arbitrary, unfounded, or unconstitutional acts.
• There is also concern and uncertainty about how the courts will apply the third transitory article to amparo proceedings that are already underway. Much will depend on the criteria adopted by each judicial body, and this could lead to constitutional challenges that eventually reach the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.