Zapotec Citizen vs. Mexican Authorities, regarding the failure to protect a Natural Protected Area in Oaxaca.

On March 11, 2024, the representative of the community of San Bartolo Coyotepec in the State of Oaxaca filed a petition for amparo (a constitutional protection action) alleging a violation of their human right to a healthy environment due to the failure of municipal, state, and federal authorities to protect Benito Juárez National Park and the Ecological Reserve Zone and Protected Natural Area. On March 20, 2025, the court denied the constitutional protection, arguing that it had based its decision on a generic perspective that did not allow for the demonstration of a specific, direct, and imminent harm resulting from the alleged lack of protection of the designated areas.

Dissatisfied with the decision, the Community Representative appealed, arguing that the Judge improperly failed to state the legal grounds that justified the decision and shifted the burden of proof to his detriment, in addition to improperly assessing the evidence that clearly demonstrated the notorious fact of the progressive deterioration and territorial reduction of the protected natural areas.

On October 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) exercised its power of attraction and admitted the matter for processing.

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, in the amparo review, resolved that:

1. The matter had to be returned to the Federal Court to gather evidence and, with further study, decide whether the human right to the environment of those who came to the amparo trial was not respected.
2. Protection should be assessed according to the precautionary principle, given that the absence of scientific certainty about the benefits of an ecosystem did not justify denying its protection or ignoring the link with users.
3. Regarding the dynamic burden of proof, the authorities were required to justify their actions and the judges had to gather additional evidence when there were indications of environmental damage.
4. That the Amparo should be resolved in accordance with the operating guidelines regarding the institutional obligation to monitor protected areas and the active role of the authorities in environmental protection.
5. All those who live in or benefit from the resources of a protected natural area could legally demand its conservation, arguing that it was no longer necessary to prove a direct personal impact to access environmental justice.
6. The concept of legitimate interest allowed access to judicial protection in environmental matters not only to neighboring residents, but also to those who benefit from the so-called "adjacent environment".
7. Environmental protection was a matter of both national and international concern, emphasizing that the International Court of Justice had recently stressed that the environment was the foundation of human life, upon which the health and well-being of present and future generations depended; that there was a close connection between the environment and the right to an adequate standard of living; and that there was no doubt that many other human rights were vulnerable to environmental degradation, and therefore the protection of that right had evolved towards the recognition of nature as a value deserving of protection in itself.

The court's decision expands protection over protected areas, allowing for legal defense even without evidence of direct harm to the claimant.

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation recognized the right of any inhabitant to seek protection in natural areas in Mexico and established a precedent by recognizing the right of any inhabitant or user of an ecosystem to demand the protection of justice to demand its protection, even if they do not demonstrate individual damage.

The resolution of February 24, 2026, benefited users of the Benito Juárez National Park by eliminating the personal injury requirement to access environmental justice.

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) ratified the concept of legitimate interest, which allows access to judicial protection in environmental matters not only to neighboring residents, but also to those who benefit from the so-called "adjacent environment".

The court held that protection must be assessed according to the precautionary principle and that the federal court handling the case did not correctly apply the applicable environmental criteria. It emphasized the provisions of Article 8.3 of the Escazú Agreement regarding the duty of States to have measures in place to facilitate the production of evidence of environmental damage, the reversal of the burden of proof, and the shifting burden of proof, and reiterated that climate change constitutes one of the greatest challenges of our time and represents an imminent risk to life, health, food security, and the balance of ecosystems on a global scale. Furthermore, it underscored that, in terms of Advisory Opinion 32/2025 on the Climate Emergency, its effects do not manifest themselves in isolation, but rather are interconnected and amplified by other adverse environmental processes, constituting what has been termed a “triple planetary crisis,” stemming from the interaction between climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss.

• Representative of various Zapotec communities

• President of the United Mexican States
• Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
• Governor of the Free and Sovereign State of Oaxaca
• Oaxaca de Juárez City Council

Benito Juárez National Park is one of the most significant protected natural areas for environmental conservation in Mexico, not only for its extraordinary biological richness but also for the strategic role it plays in protecting the ecosystems of the central region of the state of Oaxaca. The National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO) identifies it as a priority terrestrial region and as an area of importance for bird conservation, demonstrating its ecological value at the state and national levels.

According to the Benito Juárez National Park Management Program, this territory encompasses portions of various agricultural communities with which it maintains a close relationship, stemming from their shared space and the common responsibilities for the protection, care, use, and preservation of their natural resources. In addition to its extraordinary biological richness, the park provides essential ecosystem services for the people of Oaxaca, including water capture and recharge, climate regulation, and soil and forest conservation—functions crucial for maintaining environmental balance and ensuring the well-being of the communities that depend on this area.

The Benito Juárez National Park in the state of Oaxaca received the status of protected natural area on December 30, 1937. Its 2,591 hectares are home to ecosystems of tropical deciduous forest, oak and pine, which support a wide diversity of wild species.

Among the environmental benefits offered by this region are air purification, hydrological and climate regulation, and the mitigation of extreme weather events. The streams and springs within Benito Juárez National Park also guarantee the availability of water to supply a large part of the city of Oaxaca and its surrounding municipalities.

The lands of this park are notable for their ecological importance. They are home to 230 species of resident and migratory birds, as well as 39 species of reptiles, 18 of amphibians, eight of fish, and 67 of mammals.

International agreements/treaties

• Escazú Agreement
• Advisory Opinion 32/2025 of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
• OC of the International Court of Justice on climate matters.

National laws

• Political Constitution of the United Mexican States

Beginning

• Principle of prevention
• Principle In Dubio Pro Natura
• Intergenerational principle

This record was created using publicly available information. If you have information about this case or would like to suggest updates or corrections, please click here .