Autonomy Rights and the Politics of Constitutional Reform in Mexico

Bibliographic Data

ID2181000
AuthorsWillem Assies (Leiden University), Luis Ramírez Sevilla (El Colegio de México), María Del Carmen Ventura Patiño (0000-0001-6110-6835, El Colegio de México)
Year2006
Volume1
Issue1
Pages37-62
Publication date2006-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueLatin American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1744-2222 • E-ISSN: 1744-2230
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/1748683050500510000
OpenAlexW2056911596
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited13

Like other Latin American states Mexico has modified its constitution to recognize the multiethnic and pluricultural make-up of its population. The federal charter was reformed in 1992 and again in 2001. Legislation has also been reformed or is in the process of being renewed at the level of the states. This article seeks to assess the scope and depth of these changes on the basis of the work of a research team that followed the process of constitutional reform in the state of Michoacán. The conclusion offers reflections on the experiences and role of the researchers in a reform process that eventually stalled. Keywords: Indigenous rightsconstitutional reformautonomyMexico Acknowledgements This article is based on research carried out in the framework of the project 'Indigenous Peoples and State Reform' funded by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACyT), Mexico (Project No. 45173). We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers of this article for their valuable comments, which for reasons of length not always have been taken into account. A first version of this article was presented at the Third International Conference on Regional Autonomy of Ethnic Minorities at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, 11–13 June 2004, and the article certainly benefited from the comments made during this conference. Notes Notes [1] In January 1994, the Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN) occupied various towns in the southern state of Chiapas, shattering Mexico's anxiously projected image as a peaceful country without problems. 'Zapatista' refers to Emiliano Zapata, one of the heroic peasant leaders in the 1910–1920 Mexican revolution. The EZLN is largely made up of indigenous people and soon indigenous demands began to figure prominently on its agenda. The rebellion has given rise to an extensive literature among which Harvey's (1998) study and Womack's (1999) reader are outstanding. [2] Kymlicka uses the term 'illiberal', which I think is a misnomer because it smacks of too rash a value judgment. Indigenous cultures may rather be non-liberal, without being militantly anti-liberal. [3] Convention 169 has become a point of reference for indigenous legislation in Latin America and, for example, a point of departure for the Acuerdos de San Andrés between the Mexican government and the Zapatista rebels of 1996. [4] It should be noted that specific legislation on indigenous community property only emerged at a rather late stage through a Reglamento de Confirmación y Titulación de Bienes Comunales in 1958 and subsequently in the 1971 Ley Federal de Reforma Agraria, which explicitly recognized the agrarian community as a juridical institution that possesses lands, water and forests and which is clearly differentiated from the ejido, the type of property reserved for non-indigenous peasants (Vázquez, 1992, pp. 114–115). It should be noted that the 'communities' created in the context of the agrarian reform do not necessarily coincide with indigenous 'communities'. [5] For overviews of Mexican revolutionary agrarian reform and the 1992 'reform of the reform', see Cornelius and Myhre (1998) and Randall (Citation1996). For a general discussion of 'counterreforms' in Latin America, which includes a gender perspective, see Deere and León (Citation2000). [6] For concise descriptions of this process, see Womack (Citation1999) and Franco (2000). [7] Recognition as entities of public law would mean effective recognition of community authorities. Communities would be enabled to have a patrimony of their own and to establish direct agreements with other layers of government, such as the municipality, about the provision of public services. They thus would become a 'fourth layer' of government next to the municipal, state and federal level. They could also be a party in legal proceedings. [8] In fact, indigenous land rights are in a legal limbo. The constitution refers to 'the law' while the Agrarian Law (art. 106) refers to article 27 of the constitution, which was reformed in 1992 to end the land reform process and to promote market allocation of land. Both the constitution and the Agrarian Law say that the lands of 'indigenous groups' should be protected, but nothing else. [9] For comments on the surprising concern of legislators over the position of indigenous women, see Hernández Castillo (2002, 2004). [10] The use of the term ante can mean anything, from the right to elect representatives to submit a petition, through the right to participate in elections, to the right of electing representatives with voice and vote according to some sort of quota system. [11] For comments on the 2001 reform process see Alonso and Aziz (2003), Cárdenas (2001), Gómez (2003), Hernández et al. (Citation2004) and López (2002). [12] See Hernández et al. (Citation2004) and Quintero et al. (2004). In May 2003 the INI was officially dissolved and replaced with a Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas, which is to provide a framework for a 'new relation' between the State and the indigenous peoples. The innovation in terms of policies, however, is very limited and Hernández et al. (Citation2004) therefore speak of 'neo-indigenism'. [13] 'Moral persons' is used for associations, in contrast to 'physical persons'. [14] So-called cases of 'chicken-theft'. [15] This organism is supposed to co-ordinate different government branches and agencies dealing with indigenous people. [16] Here we presented a working document with the comparison of existing Mexican legislation and circulated the existing proposals for a reform in Michoacán as well as a proposal for a more integral reform of the constitution (Assies et al., Citation2004). This document had earlier been presented in the 'mixed commission'. [17] This workshop was organized by our research group at El Colegio de Michoacán. [18] Clearly, they preferred a closed commission and rejected our suggestion to invite indigenous representatives to the meetings to assure their effective participation in the organization of the consultation process. [19] This proposal was inspired, among other things, by the Colombian experience

Autonomy · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies · Law · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Politics and Society in Latin America · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub