Mexico is facing concerning numbers of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) linked to nutrition. For ultra-processed food goods, effective front-of-package warning labels (FOPWL) give consumers the information they need to defend themselves against this public health risk. Following the adoption of a FOPWL law, which became operative in October 2020, the sector has brought numerous constitutional challenges, or amparos, against the legislation. The Mexican Supreme Court recently dismissed those legal claims, ruling in favor of public health.
Corporations filed what are known as “amparos,” or legal challenges, arguing that the regulations requiring FOPWL on products containing unhealthy ingredients like sugar, sodium, and saturated fat are unconstitutional. These challenges would not have required the challengers to display FOPWLs on their products if they had been successful. This might have created a standard that would have permitted other businesses to follow suit.
Rather, the FOPWL regulations’ constitutionality was unanimously upheld by the Court. Among its principal conclusions are:
The FOPWL Regulations’ Purpose: The court upheld the goal of FOPWLs, which is to help consumers quickly and easily identify ite
ms that are high in hazardous vital nutrients, as well as to safeguard consumers’, children’s, and health and food rights, as well as to avoid noncommunicable diseases.
Protection of Human Rights and Public Health: The rulings emphasized how crucial it is to uphold the right to health and p
ublic health, as required by the Mexican Constitution and legally enforceable international agreements.
Information Right: The Court upheld the consumers’ right to clear, understandable information. FOPWLs provide as a channel for providing customers with simple and succinct access to important nutritional information.
Social Acceptance and Fulfilling the Goal of FOPWL: The rulings acknowledge the efficacy of FOPWLs and their broad acceptance among the Mexican populace, with 74% of respondents rating the availability of information on harmful critical nutrients, excess calories, and additives in packaged foods and beverages as good or very good.
Scientific Evidence: The Court has acknowledged the connection between dietary practices and health outcomes, and its rulings are supported by this evidence.
Since this was the first FOPWL case to be tried by a higher tribunal, advocates in Mexico and other surrounding nations paid special attention to it. Several organizations, including the Global Health Advocacy Incubator (GHAI), filed amicus papers arguing that Mexico’s FOPWL laws are
lawful. In its amicus brief, GHAI highlighted that dietary practices that are detrimental to health, such as consuming foods high in essential nutrients like sugar, fats, and salt, pose a significant risk for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). The brief emphasized that Mexico’s FOPWL respects rights such the right to health, enough food, knowledge, and children’s rights and is founded on the best available evidence and free from conflicts of interest.
The Mexican Supreme Court’s Amparo rulings are a victory for both legal accountability and public health. By confirming that the FOPWL restrictions are constitutional, the Court upholds the necessity of putting the interests of consumers ahead of those of businesses. The rest of the world is keeping a close eye on Mexico as it steers toward healthier eating habits because it understands the transformative power of well-informed government in creating a healthier future. The decisions established a standard for proactive government action aimed at reducing the incidence of diseases linked to nutrition.
Note: This blog post is intended solely for informational reasons and was written using the draft decisions that are accessible on the website of the Mexican Supreme Court. The final rulings have not yet been uploaded to the Court’s website as of the day this blog post was published on GHAI’s website.