Human Rights Watch (HRW) has strongly criticized a recent decision by the Mexico Supreme Court that could potentially undermine the rights of disabled individuals by altering the requirements for legislative consultation with them. HRW claims this decision risks further marginalizing an already vulnerable group.

Carlos Ríos Espinosa, HRW's associate disability rights director, emphasized that consultation is more than a procedural formality; it is a fundamental right protected under the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD). It serves as a crucial safeguard for dignity and democratic participation.

Previously, the law mandated that legislators consult with people with disabilities before passing any new laws that could affect their rights. This requirement was viewed as a vital protection against the bureaucratic neglect of citizens’ voices.

However, the court's new ruling modifies this approach. It now places the onus on individuals to specifically request consultations and permits the validation of laws deemed "beneficial" to persons with disabilities, regardless of whether the established consultation procedures were followed.

HRW argues that this new standard is vague, strips legal autonomy from disabled individuals, and risks embedding paternalistic assumptions into legislation instead of respecting individual agency.

The change was announced during a case brought by the National Commission of Human Rights, which challenged Law No. 817 for Persons with Disabilities of the State of Guerrero. This ruling marked a significant shift from previous court decisions which invalidated laws that bypassed necessary consultation protocols, such as a 2020 Chihuahua law struck down due to its failure to adhere to these procedures.

This new stance by the Supreme Court contradicts both national and international legal standards. These include the principles of equality and non-discrimination before the law as outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

In past rulings, the Supreme Court had upheld the consultation requirement, viewing it as a fundamental aspect of legal principles in Article 1 of the Mexican Constitution. For instance, the court previously struck down proposed laws on autism and education in Mexico City when it found failures in following the mandated consultation processes.

Legal experts and advocates for disability rights are now voicing concerns about the potential long-term implications of this judicial shift, fearing it could undermine the participatory rights and protections afforded to disabled individuals under Mexican and international law.