Abstract
Corporate social responsibility is not understood as a legal concept in Mexico; nevertheless, the practice of CSR is expanded in the private sector, especially understood as a corporate contribution for the betterment of society. A different focus that has started to appear recently in the country has been that of business and human rights, which involves labour and environmental aspects, and which is gradually consolidating into the public debate. However, legal and judicial practice shows that links between CSR and private international law (or business and human rights and private international law) are increasingly appearing in Mexico. In addition, the Mexican legal framework foresees interesting aspects that would be useful to address transnational judicial disputes, including in relation to choice of forum and choice of law. This chapter provides a glimpse into the legal framework that regulates these elements in Mexico, as well as examples of case law that have recently addressed business and human rights, including disputes with a transnational perspective.
Santiago Ramírez Reyes (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) and Nuria González Martín (IIJ-UNAM) provided useful insights and comments in the preparation of this report.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Secretaría de Economía, Responsabilidad Social Empresarial, available at https://www.gob.mx/se/acciones-y-programas/responsabilidad-social-empresarial.
- 2.
CEMEFI, Información institucional, available at https://www.cemefi.org/cemefi/informacion-institucional.html.
- 3.
For further information about the specific instances handled by the NCP of Mexico, see Cantú Rivera (2014).
- 4.
The English and Spanish versions of the reports are available at https://www.gob.mx/se/acciones-y-programas/responsabilidad-social-empresarial.
- 5.
See, for example, Cantú Rivera (2018).
- 6.
CNDH, Recomendación General 37/2019 sobre el respeto y observancia de los derechos humanos en las actividades de las empresas (21 May 2019).
- 7.
For a more detailed account of this and other cases, see Cantú Rivera (2016).
- 8.
In this regard, see Amparo en revisión 365/2018 (5 September 2018), where the Supreme Court of Mexico decided that any development project that may have an environmental impact must be subject to consultation before the potentially-affected communities. For further information on this case, see Botero Gómez (2019), pp. 88–90.
- 9.
Contradicción de tesis 93/2011 (26 October 2011).
- 10.
Amparo directo 50/2015 (3 May 2017).
- 11.
The amparo procedure is used, among others, to challenge the conformity of a judgment with constitutional provisions, normally before federal courts. It is a constitutional procedure originating in the 1850s under Mexican constitutional law, which was later adopted by other Latin-American jurisdictions.
- 12.
The Supreme Court of Mexico adjourned the case after Google decided to retire its brief requesting the constitutional review of a lower court decision. The case is: Amparo en revisión 587/2017 (6 December 2017).
- 13.
For further non-legal commentary on the case, see Soto Galindo J, ‘Richter vs Google va a la Suprema Corte’, El Economista (13 August 2017), available at https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/opinion/Richter-vs.-Google-va-a-la-Suprema-Corte-20170813-0001.html; Soto Galindo J, Riquelme R, ‘Richter vs. Google: La Suprema Corte confirma sentencia contra Google en México’, El Economista (6 December 2017), available at https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/empresas/La-Suprema-Corte-confirma-sentencia-contra-Google-en-Mexico-20171206-0075.html; Richter U, ‘Google Inc. y su algoritmo ante la SCJN’, El Universal (3 December 2017), available at https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/articulo/ulrich-richter/nacion/google-inc-y-su-algoritmo-ante-la-scjn, all accessed on 30 May 2019; Gil Olmos J, ‘Y sienta precedente el mexicano que venció al Goliat Google’, Proceso, No. 2145 (10 December 2017), pp. 32–34.
- 14.
Juzgado décimo primero de distrito en materia civil en la Ciudad de México, Amparo indirecto 422/2016.
References
Botero Gómez S (2019) Las empresas transnacionales y los derechos humanos. Tirant Lo Blanch, Ciudad de México
Cantú Rivera H (2014) La OCDE y los derechos humanos: el caso de las Directrices para Empresas Multinacionales y los Puntos de Contacto Nacional. Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional XIV:611–658
Cantú Rivera H (2016) The Mexican judiciary’s understanding of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. Bus Human Rights J 1(1):133–138
Cantú Rivera H (2018) La responsabilidad de las empresas en materia de derechos humanos. CNDH, Ciudad de México
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cantú Rivera, H. (2020). Mexico. In: Kessedjian, C., Cantú Rivera, H. (eds) Private International Law Aspects of Corporate Social Responsibility. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 42. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35187-8_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35187-8_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35186-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35187-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)