Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

When and why are codified constitutions efficacious? Answering these key and apparently straightforward questions turns out to be extremely challenging. The road to responding to them is paved with conceptual, theoretical, and empirical difficulties. In this article, I make a modest, but nevertheless hopefully useful, claim: that overlooking certain conceptual difficulties is detrimental to the advancement of the theoretical and empirical agenda on constitutional efficacy. In other words, I posit that empirical and theoretical research linked to these questions can benefit from a clear conceptualization of constitutional (or more broadly formal) efficacy that is consistent with their research objectives. It is not uncommon for social and political science research in this area to overlook the question “how should constitutional efficacy be conceptualized?” A close analysis of academic sources makes it clear that even specialized literature on questions related to constitutional (or more broadly formal) efficacy have assumed conceptualizations that are theoretically problematic given their research objectives, potentially leading to theoretical inconsistencies or inaccurate empirical conclusions. To exemplify this point, I analyze the conceptualization of constitutional efficacy used in two influential political science texts: Barry Weingast’s “The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of Law” and Gretchen Helmke and Steven Levitsky’s Informal Institutions and Democracy. I argue that the conceptualizations of constitutional (or more broadly formal) efficacy used in their theoretical proposals are not adequately suited to their own research objectives, and that this conceptual misfit affects the theoretical consistency and empirical applicability of their conclusions.

Although several factors have been cited to explain the excessive use of police force, its relation to corruption has yet been little explored. This is a serious omission when dealing with law enforcement agencies in which corrupt practices are both widespread and deeply ingrained, as is the case in Mexico City. On the basis of an analysis of 575 complaints regarding violations of detainees’ right to physical integrity received by the Mexico City Human Rights Commission between 2007 and 2011, many troubling patterns involving the use of excessive police force emerge, including: deeply-rooted and historicallyconditioned ways of policing; a form of moral retribution or “punishment” for individuals who resist arrest or challenge authority; poor disciplinary oversight; and lack of professional training (and competence) in resolving conflicts. Above all, the use of excessive force by Mexico City law enforcement agencies is linked to divergent forms of corruption, including extortion, crimes and the misuse of police authority to resolve private matters, among others. In order to address these problems, it is first necessary to recognize their diverse nature and their complex relation to disciplinary structures, accountability and culture.

Derived from the analysis of several election processes carried out within the last two decades, we have to ask ourselves whether there actually exists a democracy in Mexico, and if so, if it’s society is really being listened to by its government. The reality is that the number of null-votes in election processes has increased over the years, without it having any impact whatsoever in the country’s politics. In fact, the null-vote seems to have a sole and simple purpose: to express the discontent that reigns over the candidates of the political parties and the federal government in general. However, no action has been taken to legitimate this petition, which makes us wonder if a real democracy can exist in a system where the goverment do not hear their people.The purpose of this comment is to analyze the effects of an null-vote within the country and determine if there is a way to force the authorities to listen to this evident desire of the people to obtain better politicians and, therefore, better governors.

The author’s hypothesis is that modern legal theories view law solely from the standpoint of ruling class or, in Hartian language, from the external point of view. Why? In sume because legal philosophers have implicitly accepted law as the exclusive domain of government and partisan politics. This approach, however, has been disrupted by poststructuralist political developments, which serve as a powerful impetus to modify prevailing concepts. This analysis begins with Benjamín Arditi’s idea regarding what he calls “the becoming other of politics,” an argument to radically change how the law is conceived. It then examines a very particular point of the theory proposed by the legal philosopher Herbert Hart, who distinguishes between the “external” and “internal” points of view with respect to how the rules of a legal system may be described or evaluated. In effect, Hart distinguishes between: (i) the external aspect, which is the independently observable fact that people tend to obey rules with regularity; and (ii) the internal aspect, which is the obligation felt by most individuals to follow the rules. It is from this latter “internal sense” that the law acquires its normative quality. Unfortunately, Hart only applies the internal point of view to government officials, in effect rendering his thesis inconsistent. The article ends with a brief analysis of Dworkin’s Herculean judge theory, arguing that Dworkin also gets trapped between the paradigm of government and partisan politics.

This article explains the main features of the Clean Energy Obligations Market (‘CEOM’) and the relevance of the brand new Energy Transition Act (the ‘Act’), both enacted as part of the Mexican Energy Reform of 2013. The CEOM is designed to incentivize the sustainable growth of renewalable energy capacity by requiring qualified consumers and suppliers to obtain clean energy certificates that represent electricity produced from renewable sources (wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, biofuels, etc.). Although similar mechanisms have been successfully implemented worldwide, they did not achieve success overnight. This article briefly analyzes these mechanisms to highlight certain key aspects that policymakers, in Mexico and elsewhere, should bear in mind when implementing systems like the CEOM.

This note analyzes the judgment delivered by the Inter-American Court on Human Rights in the case of Brewer Carías v. Venezuela. It argues that the criteria that allowed the preliminary objection of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies contravenes the precedents of the Inter-American line of case law. By examining the origin and implications of the newly-introduced concept of an “early stage” in domestic proceedings, this note then reaches to the conclusion that it could endanger the accessibility and impact of the Inter-American Human Rights System.

The Mexican digital divide is a problem of inequality that also reflects the poverty of certain cities/areas/groups in Mexico. This note analyzes the digital divide in Mexico, as well as the legal and constitutional efforts the Mexican government has made to breach it. In 2013 and 2014, the government approved an important constitutional amendment and other legal reforms in an attempt to solve this problem with a new fiber optic network and new institutional actors. By setting up a new infrastructure, private actors will be able to offer better broadband Internet services. Nevertheless, these efforts will not benefit those who are not Internet users: the have-nots.

In the 21st century, the international community has assumed the responsibility of protecting individuals and groups from unlawful human rights abuse. This article analyzes the political tensions faced by domestic courts when they attempt to enforce international human rights norms. After presenting divergent models, it analyzes how multilateral norms relate to both the nation’s domestic law and its foreign policy. It then examines two models of human rights enforcement, followed by a comparison of the Mexican and U.S. models. This comparison shows that although both countries presented different approaches (one from within, USA; and one from the outside, Mexico) both of them enforce the norm of international responsibility to protect.

Diverse structural reforms were enacted in Mexico during 2013 and 2014. Since these reforms were made on the constitutional level, they must be translated into specific laws and regulations; and more importantly, they must be implemented in an efficient manner. As Mexico is experiencing this transformation, its relations with United States are also evolving. This transition will probably imply new challenges with regard to different aspects of the bilateral relationship. Considering that the U.S. Congress plays a significant role in shaping those relations, the purpose of this article is to analyze some significant issues that have received or are likely to receive special attention in the U.S. Congress. This article is divided into seven sections. The first one presents an analysis of the complexity of U.S.-Mexico relations. The second part includes an explanation regarding Mexican reforms of 2013 and 2014, as well as the resulted transition in the bilateral relationship. The next four sections address significant pillars of this relationship: security, economy, migration, and energy. Each of these parts comprises a general overview of the U.S.-Mexico relations in that specific matter; a description of the views of the Mexican government and reforms of its constitutional and legal framework; and an analysis of the most relevant legislative actions that have recently taken place or are likely to receive attention in the U.S. Congress. The seventh section addresses other relevant aspects that should be taken into account in the policyand law-making processes.Resumen:Diversas reformas estructurales fueron promulgadas en México durante 2013 y 2014. Dado que se realizaron a nivel constitucional, estas reformas deben traducirse en leyes secundarias y reglamentos y, aún más importante, deben implementarse de una manera eficiente. Mientras México está experimentando esta transformación, su relación con Estados Unidos de América (EE. UU.) también está evolucionando. Esta transición probablemente implicará nuevos retos en los diferentes aspectos de la relación bilateral. Considerando que el Congreso de EE.UU. desempeña un papel significativo en la configuración de dicha relación, el propósito de este artículo es analizar algunos asuntos que han recibido o probablemente recibirán atención en el Congreso de los Estados Unidos. El artículo se divide en siete secciones. En la primera se presenta un análisis de la complejidad en las relaciones entre México y EE.UU. En la segunda se incluye una explicación de las reformas promulgadas en México durante 2013 y 2014, así como un análisis de los efectos que dichas reformas han ocasionado en la relación bilateral. En los siguientes cuatro apartados se estudian pilares fundamentales de la relación: seguridad, economía, migración y energía. Cada una de estas secciones comprende una descripción de ese aspecto concreto; un análisis de la perspectiva mexicana y de las reformas a su marco jurídico; y un estudio de acciones legislativas relevantes que se han realizado, o que probablemente reciban atención, en el Congreso de EE.UU. En la séptima sección se abordan aspectos relevantes que deben considerarse en los procesos tanto legislativos como de política pública. 

For decades, the people in the Mexican state of Guerrero have been immersed in poverty, insecurity, and militarization. Accordingly in 1995, almost a year after the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) uprising, a community police corporation was formed with members of indigenous communities, in order not only to protect the population against organized and regular crime but also to administer justice with the legal grounds provided by the International Labour Organization Convention 169. Since then, many members of the Guerrero community police have been incarcerated for political reasons. One of them is Nestora Salgado, who was illegally detained by the Mexican army and incarcerated in a high security prison in Nayarit for almost 20 months. In December 2015, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention deemed the detention of Nestora Salgado as illegal and arbitrary, and requested her immediate release.Resumen:Por décadas, el pueblo del Estado Mexicano de Guerrero ha estado sumergido en la pobreza, inseguridad y militarización. Por esa razón en 1995, casi un año después del alzamiento del Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional, se fundó la policía comunitaria compuesta por las comunidades indígenas, con el objetivo no solo de proteger a la población frente al crimen organizado y el crimen en general sino, también, para administrar justicia con la base legal que otorga el Convenio 169 de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo. Desde esa época hasta la fecha, muchos integrantes de la policía comunitaria de Guerrero han sido encarcelados por motivos políticos, una de ellos es Nestora Salgado García, quien fue detenida ilegalmente por el ejército mexicano y llevada a un penal de máxima seguridad en Nayarit por aproximadamente 20 meses. En diciembre de 2015 el Grupo de Trabajo de Naciones Unidas sobre Detención Arbitraria determinó que México detuvo de manera ilegal y arbitraria a Nestora Salgado y solicitó su liberación inmediata.