
Mexico broke international law with the cartels and Americans suffer the consequences
Over many years, the United States has suffered tremendously from the cross-border impacts of the trafficking of people and drugs by Mexican cartels. From the opioid crisis fueled by fentanyl to broader public safety issues arising from cartel-facilitated crime and violence, American communities have borne the brunt of this transnational scourge. This is sad, but not new.
We are used to thinking about this as a domestic problem, but it is also the case that the Mexican government is in violation of international law by allowing harm emanating from its territory to be inflicted on America and her citizens.
By allowing so much harm to America and its citizens to emanate from Mexico, the Mexican government is violating international law by failing to rein in the criminal enterprises at the heart of the illegal trafficking. A careful analysis of international legal principles, state responsibility and treaty obligations makes it clear that Mexico is neglecting its duty to prevent harm emanating from its territory (International Law Commission, 2001).
At the core of this argument is the principle of state responsibility for acts committed by non-state actors. According to the International Law Commission's Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts, a state may be held accountable if it fails to take reasonable measures to prevent foreseeable harm to other states (International Law Commission, 2001).
In the case of Mexican cartels, the Mexican government has not exercised due diligence in curtailing the activities of these organizations, despite possessing both the capacity and the obligation to do so (Cassese, 2005). When criminal activities such as drug and human trafficking result in significant harm to American citizens, the principle of due diligence demands that Mexico take concrete actions to mitigate these risks.
Ironically, one of the most famous cases of the implementation of this principle occurred on our Northern border in the Trail Smelter arbitration between America and Canada before WWII.
Furthermore, international law upholds the principle of non-intervention, which prohibits a state from permitting its territory to be used as a launching pad for activities that cause harm to another state.
The seminal Corfu Channel case underscores the duty of states to ensure that their territories do not become conduits for external aggression (International Court of Justice [ICJ], 1949). By allowing Mexican cartels to operate with relative impunity, Mexico is enabling a situation in which its soil becomes a safe haven for criminal elements that directly inflict damage on America and her citizens.
In failing to implement and enforce robust security measures, Mexico is abdicating its responsibility to prevent cross-border harm — a breach of the non-intervention principle enshrined in international law.
Mexico's international obligations are further illuminated through its participation in several key treaties designed to combat transnational organized crime. As a signatory to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (the Palermo Convention), Mexico has explicitly committed to enacting measures to combat organized criminal groups, drug trafficking, human trafficking and human smuggling (United Nations, 2000).
Similarly, treaties such as the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961) and the Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (1988) impose legal duties on member states to control and prevent the illicit drug trade (United Nations, 1961; United Nations, 1988).
By inadequately enforcing its domestic laws against cartels and failing to disrupt their transnational networks, Mexico has long violated these international commitments. This shortfall is not a mere administrative oversight; it represents a fundamental failure to uphold the rule of law on an international scale, directly contributing to the crises that plague America's communities.
While the cartels are powerful, even de facto governments in some parts of Mexico, this does not absolve Mexico of its responsibilities under international law. The doctrine of due diligence holds that a state must take all reasonable measures, given its capacity, to prevent harm from non-state actors.
In this regard, the continued proliferation of cartel activities and their devastating effects on American society indicates that Mexico has not met this minimum standard of care. Rather than viewing these challenges as a justification for inaction, they should serve as a catalyst to work together toward more effective solutions.
Moreover, the tangible impact of cartel trafficking and violence on U.S. communities cannot be ignored. The fentanyl epidemic — a crisis largely fueled by precursor chemicals and production methods linked to Mexican cartels — has exacted a staggering human toll (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2020) and strained public resources across the United States (Drug Enforcement Administration [DEA], 2021).
In failing to implement and enforce robust security measures, Mexico is abdicating its responsibility to prevent cross-border harm — a breach of the non-intervention principle enshrined in international law.
In addition to the loss of life, the economic and social costs associated with the illicit drug trade underscore the urgent need for action. By allowing its territory to be exploited as a hub for these activities, Mexico not only compromises its own domestic security but also contributes to a broader pattern of transnational harm that violates established norms of international conduct.
It is thus clear that the Mexican government is violating international law by failing to control cartel-related activities under well-established principles of state responsibility, the doctrine of due diligence, and the obligations embedded in international treaties to which Mexico herself is a signatory (Palermo Convention, 2000; Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961).
While challenges remain on the ground, the failure to act decisively against cartels constitutes a breach of both the spirit and the letter of international law, with severe consequences for American citizens. Holding Mexico accountable for these transnational harms is not merely a matter of legal principle — it is an urgent imperative for safeguarding public safety and upholding the integrity of the international legal order.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Mexico's first judicial elections are marked by low turnout, confusion and disillusionment
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico held its first-ever judicial elections Sunday, stirring controversy and sowing confusion among voters who struggled to understand a process set to transform the country's court system. Polls closed and poll workers began counting colored ballots Sunday night with the question hanging in the air of what will become of Mexico's judiciary, the answer to which will only emerge in the coming days as results roll in. Mexico's electoral authority announced late in the night that 13% of Mexico's 100 million voters cast ballots at the polls, lagging far behind the 60% turnout just a year before during the country's presidential election. Nevertheless, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum called the voting 'a complete success.' 'Mexico is the most democratic country in the world,' she added. Experts warned of startling low turnout in the lead up to the historic elections due to the mindboggling array of unfamiliar choices and the novelty of voting for judges. Experts say those factors may throw into question the legitimacy of the election, which has faced months of fierce scrutiny. Sheinbaum, a member of Mexico's ruling party, Morena, rejected the criticisms and insisted the election would only only make Mexico more democratic and root out corruption in a system that most people in the country believe is broken. 'Whoever says that there is authoritarianism in Mexico is lying,' she said. 'Mexico is a country that is only becoming more free, just and democratic because that is the will of the people.' While some voters said they felt pushed to vote in an election they felt would determine the fate of the country's democracy, many more expressed a deep sense of apathy, citing disillusionment due to decades of corruption and lack of basic information about the vote. 'I'm not interested (in voting). Parties and their messages — they come and they go. It's all the same,' said Raul Bernal, a 50-year-old factory worker in downtown Mexico City walking is dog. A historic vote Even without the final tally, the results of the vote are set to transform Mexico's judiciary. Morena overhauled the court system late last year, fueling protests and criticism that the reform is an attempt by those in power to seize on their political popularity to gain control of the branch of government until now out of their reach. 'It's an effort to control the court system, which has been a sort of thorn in the side' of those in power, said Laurence Patin, director of the legal organization Juicio Justo in Mexico. 'But it's a counter-balance, which exists in every healthy democracy.' Instead of judges being appointed on a system of merit and experience, Mexican voters have cast ballots to choose between some 7,700 candidates vying for more than 2,600 judicial positions. Mexicans head to the polls Some of the country's voting centers opened with only a trickle of people and small lines forming throughout the day. Esteban Hernández, a 31-year-old veterinary student, said he didn't agree with electing judges and doesn't support Morena, but came to vote because 'since there isn't much participation, my vote will count more.' He had studied the candidates on a website listing their qualifications and decided to pick those who had doctorates. Other critics said they only voted for the Supreme Court and other top courts. Francisco Torres de León, a 62-year-old retired teacher in southern Mexico, called the process 'painstaking because there are too many candidates and positions that they're going to fill.' Sheinbaum's predecessor and political mentor, former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who had pushed through the judicial reform but remained out of the public eye since leaving office last year, voted in Chiapas near his ranch. 'I wanted to participate in this historic election,' he said. 'Never in the history of our country … have the people decided and had the right to elect judges.' Democratic concerns The process has raised concerns. Civil society organizations like Defensorxs have raised red flags about a range of candidates running for election, including lawyers who represented some of Mexico's most feared cartel leaders and local officials who were forced to resign from their positions due to corruption scandals. Also among those putting themselves forward are ex-convicts imprisoned for years for drug trafficking to the United States and a slate of candidates with ties to a religious group whose spiritual leader is behind bars in California after pleading guilty to sexually abusing minors. Others like Martha Tamayo, a lawyer and former congresswoman from conflict-ravaged Sinaloa, cast doubt on projections that the election could hand even more power over to criminals and criminal groups, simply because they already have a strong control over courts. 'The influence of criminal groups already exists,' she said. 'The cartels go with the judges (bribe them) whether they are elected or not.' 'You have to start with something' The public has been plagued by confusion over a voting process that Patin warned has been hastily thrown together. Voters often have to choose from more than a hundred candidates who are not permitted to clearly voice their party affiliation or carry out widespread campaigning. As a result, many Mexicans said they were going into the vote blind, though others voting Sunday noted they supported the process despite the confusion. Mexico's electoral authority has investigated voter guides being handed out across the country, in what critics say is a blatant move by political parties to stack the vote in their favor. 'Political parties weren't just going to sit with their arms crossed,' Patin said. While still unsure if his vote would improve access to justice for many Mexicans, 61-year-old actor Manuel José Contreras defended the election, Sheinbaum and her party. He cast his ballot with a tone of hope. 'The reform has its problems but we needed an urgent change,' he said. 'You have to start with something.'


San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Mexico's first judicial elections are marked by low turnout, confusion and disillusionment
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico held its first-ever judicial elections Sunday, stirring controversy and sowing confusion among voters who struggled to understand a process set to transform the country's court system. Polls closed and poll workers began counting colored ballots Sunday night with the question hanging in the air of what will become of Mexico's judiciary, the answer to which will only emerge in the coming days as results roll in. Mexico's electoral authority announced late in the night that 13% of Mexico's 100 million voters cast ballots at the polls, lagging far behind the 60% turnout just a year before during the country's presidential election. Nevertheless, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum called the voting 'a complete success." 'Mexico is the most democratic country in the world,' she added. Experts warned of startling low turnout in the lead up to the historic elections due to the mindboggling array of unfamiliar choices and the novelty of voting for judges. Experts say those factors may throw into question the legitimacy of the election, which has faced months of fierce scrutiny. Sheinbaum, a member of Mexico's ruling party, Morena, rejected the criticisms and insisted the election would only only make Mexico more democratic and root out corruption in a system that most people in the country believe is broken. 'Whoever says that there is authoritarianism in Mexico is lying,' she said. 'Mexico is a country that is only becoming more free, just and democratic because that is the will of the people.' While some voters said they felt pushed to vote in an election they felt would determine the fate of the country's democracy, many more expressed a deep sense of apathy, citing disillusionment due to decades of corruption and lack of basic information about the vote. 'I'm not interested (in voting). Parties and their messages — they come and they go. It's all the same,' said Raul Bernal, a 50-year-old factory worker in downtown Mexico City walking is dog. A historic vote Even without the final tally, the results of the vote are set to transform Mexico's judiciary. Morena overhauled the court system late last year, fueling protests and criticism that the reform is an attempt by those in power to seize on their political popularity to gain control of the branch of government until now out of their reach. 'It's an effort to control the court system, which has been a sort of thorn in the side" of those in power, said Laurence Patin, director of the legal organization Juicio Justo in Mexico. 'But it's a counter-balance, which exists in every healthy democracy.' Instead of judges being appointed on a system of merit and experience, Mexican voters have cast ballots to choose between some 7,700 candidates vying for more than 2,600 judicial positions. Mexicans head to the polls Some of the country's voting centers opened with only a trickle of people and small lines forming throughout the day. Esteban Hernández, a 31-year-old veterinary student, said he didn't agree with electing judges and doesn't support Morena, but came to vote because 'since there isn't much participation, my vote will count more.' He had studied the candidates on a website listing their qualifications and decided to pick those who had doctorates. Other critics said they only voted for the Supreme Court and other top courts. Francisco Torres de León, a 62-year-old retired teacher in southern Mexico, called the process "painstaking because there are too many candidates and positions that they're going to fill.' Sheinbaum's predecessor and political mentor, former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who had pushed through the judicial reform but remained out of the public eye since leaving office last year, voted in Chiapas near his ranch. 'I wanted to participate in this historic election,' he said. 'Never in the history of our country … have the people decided and had the right to elect judges.' Democratic concerns The process has raised concerns. Civil society organizations like Defensorxs have raised red flags about a range of candidates running for election, including lawyers who represented some of Mexico's most feared cartel leaders and local officials who were forced to resign from their positions due to corruption scandals. Also among those putting themselves forward are ex-convicts imprisoned for years for drug trafficking to the United States and a slate of candidates with ties to a religious group whose spiritual leader is behind bars in California after pleading guilty to sexually abusing minors. Others like Martha Tamayo, a lawyer and former congresswoman from conflict-ravaged Sinaloa, cast doubt on projections that the election could hand even more power over to criminals and criminal groups, simply because they already have a strong control over courts. 'The influence of criminal groups already exists,' she said. 'The cartels go with the judges (bribe them) whether they are elected or not.' 'You have to start with something' The public has been plagued by confusion over a voting process that Patin warned has been hastily thrown together. Voters often have to choose from more than a hundred candidates who are not permitted to clearly voice their party affiliation or carry out widespread campaigning. As a result, many Mexicans said they were going into the vote blind, though others voting Sunday noted they supported the process despite the confusion. Mexico's electoral authority has investigated voter guides being handed out across the country, in what critics say is a blatant move by political parties to stack the vote in their favor. 'Political parties weren't just going to sit with their arms crossed,' Patin said. While still unsure if his vote would improve access to justice for many Mexicans, 61-year-old actor Manuel José Contreras defended the election, Sheinbaum and her party. He cast his ballot with a tone of hope. 'The reform has its problems but we needed an urgent change,' he said. 'You have to start with something.'


Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mexico's first judicial elections are marked by low turnout, confusion and disillusionment
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico held its first-ever judicial elections Sunday, stirring controversy and sowing confusion among voters who struggled to understand a process set to transform the country's court system. Polls closed and poll workers began counting colored ballots Sunday night with the question hanging in the air of what will become of Mexico's judiciary, the answer to which will only emerge in the coming days as results roll in. Mexico's electoral authority announced late in the night that 13% of Mexico's 100 million voters cast ballots at the polls, lagging far behind the 60% turnout just a year before during the country's presidential election. Nevertheless, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum called the voting 'a complete success.' 'Mexico is the most democratic country in the world,' she added. Experts warned of startling low turnout in the lead up to the historic elections due to the mindboggling array of unfamiliar choices and the novelty of voting for judges. Experts say those factors may throw into question the legitimacy of the election, which has faced months of fierce scrutiny. Sheinbaum, a member of Mexico's ruling party, Morena, rejected the criticisms and insisted the election would only only make Mexico more democratic and root out corruption in a system that most people in the country believe is broken. 'Whoever says that there is authoritarianism in Mexico is lying,' she said. 'Mexico is a country that is only becoming more free, just and democratic because that is the will of the people.' While some voters said they felt pushed to vote in an election they felt would determine the fate of the country's democracy, many more expressed a deep sense of apathy, citing disillusionment due to decades of corruption and lack of basic information about the vote. 'I'm not interested (in voting). Parties and their messages — they come and they go. It's all the same,' said Raul Bernal, a 50-year-old factory worker in downtown Mexico City walking is dog. A historic vote Even without the final tally, the results of the vote are set to transform Mexico's judiciary. Morena overhauled the court system late last year, fueling protests and criticism that the reform is an attempt by those in power to seize on their political popularity to gain control of the branch of government until now out of their reach. 'It's an effort to control the court system, which has been a sort of thorn in the side' of those in power, said Laurence Patin, director of the legal organization Juicio Justo in Mexico. 'But it's a counter-balance, which exists in every healthy democracy.' Instead of judges being appointed on a system of merit and experience, Mexican voters have cast ballots to choose between some 7,700 candidates vying for more than 2,600 judicial positions . Mexicans head to the polls Some of the country's voting centers opened with only a trickle of people and small lines forming throughout the day. Esteban Hernández, a 31-year-old veterinary student, said he didn't agree with electing judges and doesn't support Morena, but came to vote because 'since there isn't much participation, my vote will count more.' He had studied the candidates on a website listing their qualifications and decided to pick those who had doctorates. Other critics said they only voted for the Supreme Court and other top courts. Francisco Torres de León, a 62-year-old retired teacher in southern Mexico, called the process 'painstaking because there are too many candidates and positions that they're going to fill.' Sheinbaum's predecessor and political mentor, former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who had pushed through the judicial reform but remained out of the public eye since leaving office last year, voted in Chiapas near his ranch. 'I wanted to participate in this historic election,' he said. 'Never in the history of our country … have the people decided and had the right to elect judges.' Democratic concerns The process has raised concerns. Civil society organizations like Defensorxs have raised red flags about a range of candidates running for election, including lawyers who represented some of Mexico's most feared cartel leaders and local officials who were forced to resign from their positions due to corruption scandals. Also among those putting themselves forward are ex-convicts imprisoned for years for drug trafficking to the United States and a slate of candidates with ties to a religious group whose spiritual leader is behind bars in California after pleading guilty to sexually abusing minors. Others like Martha Tamayo, a lawyer and former congresswoman from conflict-ravaged Sinaloa, cast doubt on projections that the election could hand even more power over to criminals and criminal groups, simply because they already have a strong control over courts. 'The influence of criminal groups already exists,' she said. 'The cartels go with the judges (bribe them) whether they are elected or not.' 'You have to start with something' The public has been plagued by confusion over a voting process that Patin warned has been hastily thrown together. Voters often have to choose from more than a hundred candidates who are not permitted to clearly voice their party affiliation or carry out widespread campaigning. As a result, many Mexicans said they were going into the vote blind, though others voting Sunday noted they supported the process despite the confusion. Mexico's electoral authority has investigated voter guides being handed out across the country, in what critics say is a blatant move by political parties to stack the vote in their favor. 'Political parties weren't just going to sit with their arms crossed,' Patin said. While still unsure if his vote would improve access to justice for many Mexicans, 61-year-old actor Manuel José Contreras defended the election, Sheinbaum and her party. He cast his ballot with a tone of hope. 'The reform has its problems but we needed an urgent change,' he said. 'You have to start with something.' ___ AP journalists in Mexico Edgar H. Clemente in Tapachula, Alba Aléman in Xalapa and Fernando Llano in Mexico City contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .