Regarding the environmental crisis in the world -and Mexico is not the exception-, everyone in the various areas and in the part that corresponds to them, has some responsibility.
At the individual level, the responsibility lies in thinking that the difference in throwing paper or garbage in an inappropriate place instead of recycling, reducing, reusing or repairing it is marginal.
The business and industrial sphere, although it has advanced a lot, it is not so clear if this late transition to concern for the environment was rather to be able to be certified as environmentally responsible companies and because the problem is palpable -it has already come to an end- or because there was a real concern and conviction of environmental causes and their importance in the lives of future generations.
In the institutional sphere, almost all countries have failed to do their part, some because they are industrialized and economically powerful, others, on the contrary, because they do not have solid institutions, respect for human rights, a rule of law that is applied everyone equally, for preventing participatory citizenship and for lack of authorities with a vocation for public service. And others, intermediate, as in the case of Mexico, with passive institutional attitudes and lost opportunities, which have no rational explanation.
The growing gap between rich and poor countries, uneven economic growth and the pressing needs of increasingly demanding populations to face natural disasters, have caused countries to continue weighing their economic growth against environmental protection. Paradoxically, economic growth is now required to face the climate crisis and transform their cities into places resilient to global warming.
That is the inconsistency, to grow economically -perhaps even without sustainability- and generate economic resources to use them to protect populations from the consequences of the environmental crisis.
The reason why humanity reached this extreme was because for decades, particularly since the early 70’s, scientists who warned about climate change and its consequences were disqualified. A disparate and accelerated economic growth was preferred over an environmentally sustainable one.
What is currently happening due to climate change and extreme weather is the destruction of entire crops that do not withstand sudden changes in temperature and the various seasons of the year condensed into a single day. Sometimes the days begin with heavy hailstorms -the hailstones have reached the size of a lemon-, followed by heat to conclude the same day with low temperatures. Plant life also has a life cycle that requires stability in the seasons of the year. As already mentioned in another article, now it is beginning to be visible how spring arrives earlier because some trees and plants bloom up to a month before what happened long ago.
What is worrying is that the impact of climate change will be reflected in a food crisis that is yet to come.
Another consequence of the climate crisis is forest fires. Since the “Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development” of 1992, 30 years ago, the “Declaration of Principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests” was issued as Annex III, which, in reality, has had little impact. The forests look drier and drier, even entire mountains in the distance, they look brown and yellow, as well as the cuts from the bulldozers that split and destroy the hills. That’s how worrying they look, instead of looking at themselves with leafy green pines. The trees that remain in the forests are dying and with them, the ecological balance, the wildlife. The diverse ecosystems that they guard are not resisting climate change or the most fearsome of predators, the hand of man.
Additional effects of the climate crisis are, on the one hand, the droughts, on the other, the floods that begin to force its inhabitants to migrate for environmental reasons to more habitable places and abandon the desert ones. This, despite the fact that the richest countries are trying to shield their cities to lessen the consequences of climate change. In addition to the fact that, in the countryside, with climate change there will be migration of plant species to countries where originally there was no harvest of these crops.
Finally, another consequence of climate change with the so-called “heat waves” or the other extreme, the “cold fronts”, which are also experienced with increasing frequency. Australia, for example, reached 50.7 degrees Celsius on January 14 of this year, 2022, in the last heat wave. This is a temperature not suitable for human life or for wild animals. Human beings, faced with such severe environmental crises, are protected by their government, but when the budget to protect wildlife animals is not enough, who protects them? They are the least responsible for habitat loss and climate change.
The next day, on January 15 of this year, 2022, a heat wave was reported in Argentina throughout its territory, but in some areas it reached 43.4 degrees Celsius.
The same thing happened in Canada in the first week of July 2021, with temperatures topping 49 degrees.
So we could analyze each of the countries. Similar conclusions would be reached, the forests are burning and the heat waves causing the death of the inhabitants and the animals of the wild life. The same happens with the other extreme, cold fronts, frosts, rains and hailstorms that were previously atypical, which are now becoming more frequent.
At present everyone is amazed, including public authorities, but why didn’t they do their homework when the law required them to do so? Impossible to think that it was due to lack of capacity or vision, there must necessarily be another explanation.
In the case of Mexico, in 2013 the Environmental Responsibility Law was published. In its third transitory article, it was stated that “THIRD.- The District Courts specialized in environmental matters must be established within a maximum term of two years counted from the entry into force of this Decree. Jurisdiction specializing in environmental matters may be granted to the District Courts in office in each jurisdictional circuit or in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Judiciary Council, without this implying the creation of new jurisdictional bodies. The staff of each of said District Courts will receive specialized training in environmental regulations.”
2015 arrived and the interpretation of this transitory article, despite its clarity in the sense that specialized courts in environmental matters should be created, was “fulfilled” with the “General AGREEMENT 27/2015 of the Plenary Session of the Council of the Federal Judiciary, which specifies the jurisdiction of the mixed, specialized and semi-specialized District Courts of the Mexican Republic, which currently have jurisdiction in administrative trials, to attend to environmental matters indicated in the Federal Environmental Responsibility Law”.
In other words, the specialized courts in environmental matters were not created as ordered by the Environmental Responsibility Law because the cases in this matter continued to be heard by the jurisdictional bodies in administrative matters.
Priority was given to the economic aspect over the environmental one, because courts and tribunals specializing in economic competition, broadcasting and telecommunications were created, but it is reiterated that environmental matters would continue to be heard by the administrative courts and tribunals without the creation of specialized courts and tribunals. environmental matter.
The second opportunity that the Federal Judiciary had was last year and it also lost this great opportunity.
On March 11, 2021, a series of constitutional reforms to the Judicial Power of the Federation were published and on June 7, 2021, a new Organic Law of the Judicial Power of the Federation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation. Likewise, to harmonize the reforms, some articles of the Amparo Law were modified.
The issue was that, unlike the human rights and protection reforms of June 6 and 10, 2011 and the Protection Law of 2013, which had the participation of all sectors of civil society and respected the principles of open parliament and good faith, the constitutional reforms of March and June 2021 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Power of the Federation, for some unknown reason, were prepared behind closed doors, regardless of the thirteenth transitory article that, in addition to the secrecy of the law itself , suddenly came out because of the personal agreements about the institution for the administration of justice.
It is interesting to ask if it is time for the Federal Judicial Power to have within its powers the initiative of laws of its competence. It is not a new or minor issue, however, it was the fact of having transgressed in this new Organic Law of the Judicial Power of the Federation the principle of open parliament and justice.
As the law was not put up for debate, circuit judges, barristers and lawyers, as well as society in general, were prevented from ruling on its gaps and execution, as was done ten years earlier. .
The consequence in environmental terms is that the courts and tribunals specialized in environmental matters have not been created because those who prepared the draft Organic Law of the Judicial Power of the Federation and the constitutional and protection reform of 2021, did not give it the importance that the crisis climate requires that it be given, nor the need to abide by the Environmental Responsibility Law.
Every public official must be held accountable for their actions and the consequences of their actions. In environmental matters, they must bear in mind the proportional part of responsibility, which corresponds to them.
