Opinion ID: 2798172
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Mexican Constitution

Text: Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution 9 contains the following broad statements about property ownership: Ownership of lands and waters within the boundaries of national land territory 10 is vested originally in the Nation, which has had and has, the right to transmit title thereof to private persons, thereby constituting private property. . . . The Nation has full ownership over all natural resources of the continental shelf and the seabed and subsoil of the marine areas of the islands . . . . The Nation has full ownership over the waters of territorial sea in the extension and under the terms set forth by International Law . . . . 9 Our translations of Mexico’s Constitution derive entirely from an official version printed by the Mexican Supreme Court, and available on that court’s official website at https://www.scjn.gob.mx/normativa/ConstEnglish/CONSTI%20INGLES%20SEPT%202010. pdf. 10 “National land territory,” as used in Article 27, is a term of art with an expansive definition. Defined in Article 42 of the Constitution, it includes: “I. The land territory of all the portions constituting the Federation; II. The territory of the islands, including the reefs and keys in adjacent seas; . . . IV. The continental shelf and the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas of the islands, keys and reefs; [and] V. The waters of the territorial seas in the extension and under the terms established by International Law and domestic maritime laws.” 12 Case: 13-31070 Document: 00513028113 Page: 13 Date Filed: 05/01/2015 No. 13-31070 In the cases established in [the preceding two paragraphs], the Nation’s dominion is inalienable and not subject to the statute of limitation and the exploitation, use or enjoyment of the resources in question by private persons or by companies incorporated in accordance with Mexican laws, may not be undertaken save by means of concessions granted by the President of the Republic and in accordance with the rules and conditions set forth by the Laws. Political Constitution of the United Mexican States (“Mexican Constitution”), Article 27, ¶¶ 1, 4–6. This constitutional provision is essentially decisive of this case. Article 27 means that “Mexico’s public domain over these assets is inalienable and cannot be taken away from the federal government by adverse possession, by either Mexican nationals or foreigners.” Jorge A. Vargas, Mexican Law: A Treatise for Legal Practitioners and International Investors § 34.4 (2001) [hereinafter Mexican Law: A Treatise] (emphasis added); see also Jorge A. Vargas, Mexican Law for the American Lawyer 161 (2009). The Mexican States propose a more holistic understanding of the critical word “Nation,” a term not defined in the Mexican Constitution. They argue that it embraces the entire Mexican people, and not only the federal government. However, that expansive reading is foreclosed by several interpretations of the term “Nation” in the context of the Mexican constitutional provisions outlined above. The Mexican Supreme Court has interpreted the term “Nation” narrowly, stating that “[t]he nation cannot be mistaken for a state, and consequently, State officials are not the ones who represent it because it is unique and represented by its federal agencies.” In re Oil Spill, 970 F. Supp. 2d at 533 (citing Nacion, Representacion de la, [TA]; 5a. Epoca; 2a. Sala; S.J.F.; LII; Pag. 72 (Registro No. 332930)). 11 And one 11 The Mexican States’ arguments against our consideration of this case are unavailing. First, the States claim that the proper translation of the initial clause is “the nation cannot be mistaken for a federal entity,” which would lead to a different conclusion. 13 Case: 13-31070 Document: 00513028113 Page: 14 Date Filed: 05/01/2015 No. 13-31070 commentator on Mexican law explicitly provides that “Nation,” as used in Article 27, means the federal government. See Stephen Zamora et al., Mexican Law 495 (2004). 12 Professor Vargas proposes a more nuanced account of the distribution of sovereignty: Under Mexican law, all of the “elements” that compose the national territory of Mexico (including their corresponding natural resources) belong to the Mexican Nation (and not to the Federation or to each of the federal entities), with the legal and political understanding that the Nation is represented by the federal government. Jorge A. Vargas, Mexico and the Law of the Sea 9 (2011) (footnotes omitted). Under either view, we conclude, the Mexican Constitution vests the federal government with the necessary proprietary interest for purposes of Robins Dry Dock. This conclusion about federal supremacy is strengthened by the text in the sixth paragraph of Article 27, which clarifies that only the federal government, through Mexico’s president, can allow “exploitation, use or enjoyment” of the long list of resources delineated in the preceding two paragraphs. See Mexican Constitution, Article 27, ¶¶ 4–6; see also Corporacion Mexicana de Servicios Maritimos, S.A. de C.V. v. M/T Respect, 89 F.3d 650, 653 (9th Cir. 1996), as amended on denial of reh’g (Aug. 28, 1996) (“Under Article 27 of the Constitution of the United Mexican States, the government of Mexico is the only entity that may own and exploit the country’s natural We are unpersuaded that the translation the district court used is incorrect, however, because the official Mexican Supreme Court translation of the Mexican Constitution translates the same term—“entidad federativa”—as “state.” See Mexican Constitution, Article 27, ¶ 5. Second, while the case appears not to be controlling precedent under Mexican law, we find persuasive the Mexican Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Mexican Constitution. The Mexican States have not offered any subsequent Mexican Supreme Court decision that embraces their preferred interpretation of the term “Nation.” 12 Professor Zamora served as an expert for Halliburton in this case. 14 Case: 13-31070 Document: 00513028113 Page: 15 Date Filed: 05/01/2015 No. 13-31070 resources . . . . The Constitution permits the federal government to create organizations that manage and distribute these resources.” (emphasis added) (citation omitted)). 13