Mexico Country Profile

Snapshot

General Information

Corruption Levels

Initiatives

Resources

Information Network

Sources

Show All

General Information

Political Climate

Mexico has for many years now attracted substantial foreign investment thanks to its well-developed infrastructure, liberal regulatory regime and political commitment towards improving the business climate. Former President Vicente Fox actively pursued free market policies by introducing several liberal reforms as well as a range of measures aimed at improving the Mexican business climate. In July 2006, Fox was succeeded by Felipe Calderon, also of the National Action Party (PAN). Calderon won a narrow victory over his left-wing opponent, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, in elections surrounded by accusations of fraud. Calderon became popular within the private sector for continuing Fox's business-friendly policies. However, legislative elections held in July 2009 resulted in a setback for the President and for the PAN. The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which governed the country for 71 years during the 20th century only to lose presidential elections to the PAN in 2000, again became the largest party in the Lower House of Parliament and won the majority of governors' posts at stake. Aside from financial difficulties and consequential levels of unemployment, high levels of corruption, increasing drug-related crime rates and continuing disproportionate distribution of wealth in the country also negatively affected the PAN's position going into the elections.

Mexico's anti-corruption strategy has focused on three areas: prisons, the police force, and customs. President Calderon has clearly stated that cleaning up corruption in these sectors is of strategic importance for winning the fight against powerful drug cartels operating in the Northern States of Mexico. Using the army, some progress has actually been made in targeting smuggling activities, but a major scandal shook the campaign at the end of 2008, when top federal anti-drug officials were caught accepting bribes from drug cartels in return of information (see this profile's special page on drug trafficking and corruption in Mexico for more information). Several observers such as Freedom House 2009 have argued that the government's overall anti-corruption strategy has been unsuccessful. Many of the problems are fuelled by inadequate control systems in local state administrations, and some Mexican states suffer from notoriously poor governance. Sources report that local politicians are occasionally involved in corrupt activities and organised crime, but are nevertheless protected by local patronage networks and state power. The federal structure of the Mexican political system is thus frequently cited as contributing to the inefficiency of federal anti-corruption initiatives. High-profile cases are rarely prosecuted, but observes note that President Calderon's admission at the end of 2008 to the problem of corruption within the higher ranks of the public administration can potentially change the situation.

Petty corruption is reportedly widespread in Mexico. Latinobarómetro 2009 (see English version) shows that 17% of respondents reported that they or their relatives had known of an act of corruption in 2009. The Latinobarómetro 2008 (see English version) shows very low levels of trust in the public administration and in politicians, as respondents estimate that 73% of all civil servants are corrupted and only 28% believe that the government's anti-corruption efforts have been effective. Low trust in politicians is also confirmed by Transparency International Bribe Payers Index 2008 in which business executives rank political parties as the second most corrupt institution in Mexico, while 80% of the business executives surveyed perceive the government's actions to fight corruption as 'ineffective' or 'very ineffective'. The Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish) estimates that an average Mexican household pays 8% of its income in bribes per year.

Business and Corruption

According to the US State Department 2009, the federal government has introduced several initiatives that reduce the number of contact points between companies and front-line officials that have helped remove some of the possibilities for extracting bribes in return for public services. Private companies form the backbone of the Mexican economy, and the federal government has introduced several measures to eliminate non-transparent practices in the public and private sectors in order to stimulate private sector growth. One such measure has been the establishment of the Federal Competition Commission (in Spanish), which is active in fighting monopolies in the Mexican economy. Furthermore, an approved tax reform came into effect in January 2008 which includes a much debated corporate tax (IETU) and represents an attempt to stamp out tax fraud in the informal sector. Despite such initiatives, companies indicate in the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 that corruption and inefficient government bureaucracy are still the two most problematic factors for doing business in Mexico. In addition, a CEESP 2007 business survey (in Spanish) conducted among 400 companies in Mexico revealed that the respondents perceive insecurity, piracy/falsification, the informal economy and the dysfunctional judiciary to be the largest constraints for business development. Mexico is struggling with an enormous informal sector, and informal mechanisms are generally cited as a major problem by companies operating in Mexico. According to observers, small companies in Mexico are much more vulnerable to corrupt public officials and to the competition of the informal sector which is estimated to constitute between 40 to 50% of the total economy.

According to the KPMG Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en Mexico 2008 (in Spanish), a survey conducted among 235 companies operating in Mexico, 80% of companies are affected by corruption and USD 900 million was estimated to be lost in Mexico's private sector to internal fraud in 2007 alone. The survey shows that 44% of the companies surveyed paid bribes to public officials and did so most frequently at the municipal level. These bribes cost them an average of 5% of their annual revenues. Of the companies surveyed, 43% reported that they paid bribes primarily in order to circumvent slow and confusing procedures, while 32% paid bribes to obtain licences or permits and 21% to avoid abuses from authorities. As a consequence of not paying bribes to public officials, 47% of companies experienced slower procedures, 27% were punished with fines, 21% lost a contract and 7% lost public surveillance or protection of their companies. A PricewaterhouseCoopers 2007 business survey (in Spanish) reveals that 46% of domestic companies report having been subjected to economic crimes, such as corruption, an increase of almost 10% from a similar survey in 2005.

Business-to-business corruption is reportedly also a major problem. Business executives surveyed by the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 indicate that the ethical behaviour of companies in Mexico constitutes a competitive disadvantage. Mexican companies perform poorly according to the Transparency International Bribe Payers Index 2008, which ranks the world's 22 leading exporting countries according to the propensity of their companies to bribe when operating abroad. The KPMG 2008 survey mentioned above shows that 77% of surveyed companies suffered from fraud at least once in the preceding year. Of those incidences of fraud, 46% were perpetrated by an employee either alone or in cooperation with a customer or business partner. In 25% of these cases of fraud, the total financial losses incurred amounted to at least MXN 1 million, whereas in 10% of the cases it amounted to more than MXN 5 million. PricewaterhouseCoopers' 2007 business survey also shows that, among the reported cases of economic fraud, 32% of the respondents claim that they have suffered from embezzlement of funds. Fraud was typically detected by internal audit systems; however, Mexican companies suffer from ineffective internal audit systems, indicating that a huge proportion of economic crimes are likely to go undetected. Above and beyond the reputational risk they run if caught engaging in corrupt practices, companies should be aware that they are also liable for bribery and corruption carried out by agents on their behalf. For these reasons, companies are advised to develop, implement and strengthen integrity systems and to carry out extensive due diligence before investing in and while doing business in Mexico.

Regulatory Environment

The Federal Commission on Regulatory Improvement (COFEMER, in Spanish), operating under the Secretariat of Economy (SECON), is responsible for reducing the regulatory burden on business. The Quality Regulatory Agreement of 2006 allows for the creation of new regulations only when agencies are able to prove that these are needed because of emergencies, in order to comply with international commitments, or because of obligations established by law. Figures from the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2010 show that starting a business and building a warehouse in Mexico take less time and procedures at a lower cost than in other countries in the region. According to Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2009, the shortening of the time required to start a company has resulted in a rise in registered companies, thus reducing the informal sector in the country. Moreover, Mexico has made much needed reductions in the number of payments and time spend on filing and paying taxes, which has traditionally been a competitive disadvantage in the country. Despite this, companies still cite bureaucratic bottlenecks and lack of administrative transparency as obstacles to business operations. In the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010, the surveyed companies cite inefficient government bureaucracy as the most problematic factor for doing business in Mexico. In addition, surveyed business executives report that although it is relatively easy to get information on changes in government policy-making and regulatory changes, it can be extremely burdensome to comply with governmental administrative procedures. According to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, senior managers spend more than 20% of their time dealing with requirements of government regulation in Mexico. However, it must be noted that several surveys indicate that the level and type of regulatory burden and related corruption differ widely between Mexican regions and states (see this profile's special page on regional differences in the Mexican regulatory environment).

Despite some regulatory constraints, Mexico has made progress in simplifying procedures in relation to foreign investment. The Ministry of Economy (SE) has established the ProMexico portal through which companies can access information and forms, links, import/export permit applications, online tax payments and advice on investment and trade-related questions. The portal also provides companies with links to the Rapid Business Start-Up System which reduces the number of formalities required to open a company in Mexico. Similar initiatives have been developed in some of the states. The Foreign Investment Law 2006 (in Spanish), which is consistent with the foreign investment chapter in the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), regulates investments, and there are only a few restrictions on foreign investment. To strengthen ties between Mexican and foreign companies, the government-owned development bank Nacional Financiera (in Spanish) promotes Mexican-foreign joint ventures for the production of capital goods. Nacional Financiera provides loans to companies in priority development areas and industries. Companies investing in export processing zones, such as the maquiladora industry, should follow the Ministry of Economy's IMMEX guidelines (in Spanish) from late 2006 closely, preferably in close consultation with locally-based legal advisors.

Business executives surveyed by the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 report that the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations, be it in relation to property rights or contract enforcement, is relatively inefficient and may be subject to manipulation. In addition, the US Department of State 2009 reports that commercial disputes, especially in real estate transactions, often take years to resolve in Mexican courts. Dispute settlement is provided for in Chapter 11 of the NAFTA agreement which states that investors may initiate arbitration under both the New York Convention 1958 (UNCITRAL) and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) rules. The Mexican government and courts generally recognise and enforce arbitral awards. Companies should also note that Mexico struggles with issues of falsification, i.e. infringements of intellectual property rights (IPR), which are poorly protected in practice. Many efforts are put into improving the protection of IPR, but corruption among customs officials, police officers and in the judicial system blocks many well-intentioned initiatives in this field.

Mexico Regulatory Environment

Regional Differences in Corruption and the Regulatory Environment

Surveys indicate that the federal structure in Mexico entails great regional variations in the level and impact of corruption. These horizontal variations are compounded by vertical variations. A CEESP 2005 business survey (in Spanish) reveals that companies pay bribes to public officials at either the federal, state or municipal level depending on the public service they want to receive. The survey shows that 22% of companies interacting with the federal level pay bribes in order to access public utilities. Of the companies dealing with state level regulations, 20% report that they pay bribes to bend rules or to circumvent regulatory measures. Finally, at the municipal level, 19% of companies report having to pay bribes to access public utilities. The fact that the level and impact of corruption differs from state to state is confirmed by the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish). The index reveals that corruption in public services is more prevalent in the states of Estado de Mexico, Distrito Federal (Mexico City), Tlaxcala, Puebla and Morelos, whereas the states of Colima, Aguascalientes, Guanajuato, Nayarit and Michoacán are perceived to be least affected by corruption in public services. The states of Distrito Federal and Michoacán are those which improved the most since the first ranking in 2001. According to the CEESP 2005 business survey, 53% of companies in Hidalgo, 41% in Tabasco and 33% in Distrito Federal report that they have paid bribes in order to influence the content of laws, policies and regulations. These states are also those in which the highest percentage of companies report paying bribes to influence the decisions of public officials at the federal, state and municipal levels.

The CEESP 2005 business survey provides some in-depth knowledge as to which services are more prone to corruption than others in the different states:

• Aguascalientes: Bribes are most frequently paid to obtain federal government permits and licences, to access public utilities administered by the federal and municipal levels, to ignore federal environmental regulations and to ease state regulations.
• Distrito Federal: Companies most frequently pay bribes to access federal public utilities, to win federal and municipal government contracts, to ignore violations of labour regulations and to ease state regulations.
• Jalisco: Bribes are most frequently paid by companies to access public utilities administered by the federal and municipal levels, to ignore violations of federal labour security regulations and to avoid being harassed by the municipal police.
• Nuevo Leon: Bribes are most frequently paid to obtain federal financial privileges, to obtain reductions in federal regulatory fees, to ignore violations of federal labour security regulations and to ease state regulations.
• Baja California: Companies most frequently pay bribes to win federal government contracts, to access federal and municipal public utilities and to ease state regulations.
• Quintana Roo: Bribes are most frequently paid by companies to obtain federal government permits and licences, to obtain reductions in federal government regulatory fees, to access federal public utilities and to ease state regulations in general.

Some states are perceived as 'cleaner' than others according to the CEESP 2005 business survey and companies pay bribes for different types of public services in different states. However, the survey also indicates that in all states some public services are more prone to corruption than others, such as obtaining licences and connecting to federal and municipal public utilities. Bribes are also frequently paid to inspectors in order to ignore violations, and to ensure that state regulations are not applied so strictly. More detailed information can be found in the CEESP 2005 business survey, Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial, and in the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2005 (in Spanish).

Companies should also be prepared to meet substantial differences in the regulatory environment from state to state in Mexico. The World Bank & IFC Doing Business Subnational Report 2009 reveals that many states in Mexico are fully competitive in a range of procedures affecting the business climate. All states are subject to the same laws, but the municipal and state requirements vary, which can affect the number of procedures, the costs of meeting regulations, and the time it takes to do business in some states. These are some of the findings of the study:

• Starting a business: Easiest in Celaya, Puebla and Torreón (12 days) and most difficult in slowest in Colima (57 days). Campeche is the cheapest location to start a business, whereas companies face much higher costs in Ciudad Juarez (25.6% of GDP per capita) and Tijuana (24.7% of GDP per capita).
• Registering property: Fastest in Morelia and Zacatecas (5 administrative procedures averaging 16 days) and slowest in Cancún (8 administrative procedures averaging 104 days).
• Enforcing contracts: Fastest in Zatecas (248 days) and Monterrey (256 days) and slowest in La Paz (497 days) and Cancún (560 days).

Drug Trafficking and Corruption

Collusion, Bribery, Money Laundering and Violence Related to Drug Trafficking in Mexico

Mexico has been plagued by problems with drug cartels for many years. According to Freedom House 2009, the situation has actually worsened over the past several years, with the amount of drug-related killings reaching record highs through 2006-2007 and a staggering death toll of 6,200 people in 2008, among which were 500 police officers and soldiers. The situation has not improved in 2009, with approximately 800 killings in the month of June alone. Business executives surveyed by the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 indicate that security issues, such as high levels of crime, extortion and kidnappings, often related to drug trafficking, are among the most significant problems facing businesses operating in Mexico today. Episodes of violence frequently involve citizens who have reported drug-related crimes, resulting in reluctance and genuine fear on behalf of civilians to report such crimes. Journalists exposing connections between the drug cartels and politics have also been harassed and even killed.

On the political agenda, the fight against narcotics is a special focus area. President Calderon's government has devoted much attention and resources to combating organised crime related to drug trafficking. Global Integrity 2007 reports that, upon his election in 2006, President Calderon said that he would be drug traffickers 'worst enemy'. The Mexican government's strategy has focused on three areas: 1) destroying cultivation fields, 2) stopping the trafficking of narcotics and chemicals used in their production, and 3) combating the organised crime flourishing around drug smuggling. Above the obvious criminal and negative social effects accompanying drug smuggling, the cartels' enormous economic power has fuelled high levels of police corruption. Especially in the Northern States, where cartels smuggle drugs into the US, the police is believed to be on cartels' payroll. An investigation of the police forces of Monterrey actually resulted in the arrest of 141 police officers reportedly working for the Gulf Cartel, which controls smuggling into Texas. The army was deployed to replace corrupt police units by President Calderon in the most affected states, but with mixed results: Freedom House 2009 reports of military personnel caught accepting bribes just a few days after they were deployed. An opinion poll cited by Freedom House 2009 shows that popular support for President Calderon's efforts is fading, not least of all because of scandals like that from 2008 which developed after high-ranking counter-narcotics officers were caught passing sensitive information to cartels.

Mexico collaborates with the US to combat drug smuggling. Among other sources, Global Integrity 2007 reports of drug lords being extradited to the US for prosecution. Shared intelligence and a USD 1.4 billion agreement signed in 2008 to finance counter-narcotics are also part of the cooperation between the two countries. President Calderon, however, has been very outspoken regarding the necessity to work against corruption that plagues US customs control and on the demand side of the problem, i.e. the US government should focus on diminishing the use of narcotics in the US money laundering remains a problem; the Mexican Prosecutor office estimates that between USD 10 and 25 billion in drug money enters Mexico from the US each year. Figures from the US Drug Enforcement Administration range between USD 25 and 30 billion. It is believed that drug money is used to influence the political system, especially at the local level.

Judicial System

Individual Corruption

According to the Latinobarómetro 2008 (see English version), very few Mexicans believe that all citizens have equal access to the judicial system. Global Integrity 2007 reports that access to justice might be influenced by ethnicity and gender as indigenous people and women are often discriminated against. Furthermore, the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish) reveals that citizens are frequently asked for bribes when taking cases to court. This finding is backed by Transparency International's Global Corruption Barometer 2006 in which citizens rank the judiciary among Mexico's most corrupt institutions.

Business Corruption

Companies should note that the Mexican judicial system is characterised by delays and unpredictability, especially in lower courts and in rural areas. Business leaders surveyed by the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 do not report a high degree of confidence in Mexico's judiciary or legal system. Companies should be aware that several sources describe the corrupt and inefficient judiciary as an obstacle for settling commercial disputes in Mexico. Additionally, the US Department of State 2009 reports that disputes related to real estate transactions may take years to settle in Mexican courts, although with great variations from state to state. Observers report that bribery occurs in the early stages of court cases dealing with alleged corruption and bribery. The Public Prosecutor's Office is the sole agency charged with initiating criminal legal action or conducting initial investigations. Facilitated by this monopoly on raising criminal charges and compounded by discretion on whether to do it, the situation has evolved in cases being settled by means of bribes to officials from the Public Prosecutor's Office for them not to start an official investigation nor bring criminal charges.

According to a CEESP 2007 business survey (in Spanish), companies generally evaluate the quality and transparency of courts to be very low. This tendency is especially pronounced for large companies when they deal with judicial authorities at the federal level. The business community, through the Mexican Employers Union (Confederacíon Patronal de la República Mexicana, Coparmex) is nevertheless reacting to cases in which biased decisions were rendered in exchange for bribes. In fact, in November 2008, the newspaper El Norte reported of a meeting on this issue between high-ranking government officials and Coparmex's National Secretary.

Political Corruption

The separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches is defined by law, and there has been progress in making the procedure for selecting high court judges more transparent. However, in practice, large sections of the judiciary suffer from politicisation. Judges have been involved in corruption, organised crime and drug trafficking. According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, impunity for members of the judiciary is part of the Mexican legal culture. Freedom House 2009 reports that lower courts are characterised by widespread bribery and the Council of the Federal Judgeship, which is the judges' oversight institution, is said to lack independence and to be ineffective in initiating investigations. The majority of its members are from the judiciary, which raises concerns about conflicts of interest, as members of the judiciary may choose to protect their colleagues. The judiciary rarely prosecutes high-profile cases, but instead tends to focus on minor crimes, thus paving the way for widespread impunity for powerful elites and for those able to pay bribes. According to the Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2007, lower-ranking judges are pressured into following 'instructions' and protecting the interests of their superiors. The Public Prosecutor's Office, the sole organ which can decide to initiate investigations of alleged corruption and bribery, is not independent from the President at the federal level or from governors at the local level. Consequently, independent investigations against officials from the ruling party are very difficult to undertake and rarely take place.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- Enforcing a commercial contract in Mexico requires a company to go through an average of 38 administrative procedures, taking an average of 415 days at a cost of 32% of the claim.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the Mexican judiciary's level of independence from influences of members of government, citizens, or companies a score of 3.2 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give the efficiency of the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations a score of 3.2 and 3.3 respectively on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008:
- Business executives give the judiciary a score of 4.3 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Latinobarómetro: Annual Report 2008 (see English version):
- 45% of the respondents believe that it is likely or very likely to succeed in bribing a judge.

CEESP: Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en Mexico 2007 (in Spanish):
- Companies give the judiciary a score of 4.5 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'no obstacle' and 7 being 'big obstacle').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 26.6% of companies surveyed believe that the court system is fair, impartial and uncorrupted.

- 10% of companies surveyed identify the functioning of the courts as a major business constraint.

Police

Individual Corruption

The Mexican police force has a reputation for being corrupt and incompetent, as well as for collaborating with criminals. Citizens rarely report crimes due to their perception of law enforcement officials as either being inefficient or in league with criminals. According to Freedom House 2009, a large proportion of crimes in Mexico go unreported (80% in Mexico City according to the 2007 report) and very few crimes are solved. Police forces in the major cities are perceived to be especially corrupt.

Citizens have frequent problems with corrupt traffic police, who demand bribes in return for not removing illegally parked vehicles and for not imposing expensive fines. People report that they pay bribes in order to avoid detention by traffic police officials and to avoid having their vehicles seized and removed to vehicle stockyards. According to the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish), citizens rank traffic police services as the most corrupt of 35 public services.

Business Corruption

Companies should note that the Mexican police have a reputation as being notoriously corrupt and involved in a wide range of illicit activities, such as extortion, organised crime and drug trafficking. Business executives surveyed by the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 indicate that security issues, such as high levels of crime and kidnapping, often related to drug trafficking, are among the most significant problems facing business in Mexico today. However, they are also highly critical of the reliability of the police force to protect them from crime. The US Department of State 2008 reports that impunity is pervasive and contributes to the continued reluctance of many victims to file complaints. Responsibility for investigating federal police abuse falls under the purview of the Procudaría General de la Republica (Public Prosecutor's Office) and the Secretariat of Public Administration, depending on the type of offense.

Bribery is also very common during interactions with the Mexican traffic police. Paying bribes in order to avoid detention for alleged traffic offences is common practice, and traffic police may also ask for bribes in return for not impounding vehicles. The Northern States of Mexico suffer from endemic corruption among local police officers who often supplement their low salaries by demanding bribes from tourists, exporters and importers. The city of Monterrey has responded to this situation by banning drinking and driving roadblocks, most of which has been used purely for extortion, and prohibiting cell phones while on duty in order to prevent police officers from tipping off criminals. The Monterrey authorities have also submitted traffic police officers to a corruption and competence test, which resulted in the dismissal of a quarter of the traffic police force in November 2009. Police are also frequently accused of being on the payroll of drug cartels. As an example, federal police in 2007 arrested 141 police officers in Monterrey, accusing them of working for the Gulf Cartel, which controls smuggling routes into Texas. Although this represents a successful operation by the Mexican federal police, a CEESP 2007 business survey (in Spanish) reveals that Mexican companies perceive the federal police to be the most dishonest federal institution in the country. Companies also identify the police as the most dishonest institution at the state and municipal levels.

Increased focus on police corruption began in the Mexican media in 2008 after it was revealed that police officers were deeply involved in the kidnapping of the son of a rich businessman. The son and his driver were found dead even though the family paid a large ransom. The case is just one out of many kidnapping cases in which police officers have been involved.

Political Corruption

According to the US Department of State 2008, the federal, state and municipal police forces included approximately 500,000 agents in 2008. At the state and local level, police are generally divided into preventive and judicial police. Constitutional clauses governing states' sovereignty mean that local governments are free to provide uniforms and weapons to local police units without running any background checks on these officials. The police force is generally rife with corruption, and there are continuing allegations of police officials' involvement in organised crime, drug trafficking and kidnapping. In 2008, Congress passed a legislation to vet all the country's 2,500 police forces within a four-year period. The operation resulted by the year's end in the arrest of several high-ranking police officials. In a June 2009 article the Wall Street Journal reports, along with other newspapers, that such operations against allegedly corrupt local police, especially in the northern states of the country, have continued throughout 2009, resulting in several arrests of police officers and even police chiefs.

The Mexican police's involvement in drug trafficking at Mexico's northern borders is an issue of concern for President Calderon, who has promised to fight corruption among local police forces. In an attempt to root out corruption and collaboration between police officers and drug cartels, Calderon sent hundreds of federal police officers to the northern border areas to clean up corrupt local police units. Only days later, however, these federal units were caught soliciting bribes. Army soldiers have been deployed in the northern areas to fight corrupt police officers helping drug cartels, and violent clashes between army soldiers and police officers has occurred more than 65 times during 2009. Endemic police corruption seriously impedes any effort to fight drug cartels. In October 2008, a major corruption case regarding the infiltration of a major drug cartel in the Mexican Attorney General's Organised Crime Unit was revealed. Five employees from the unit were arrested on allegations that they served as informants for a major drug cartel in exchange of monthly 'salaries' of between USD 150,000 and USD 450,000. The revelations of corruption inside the control centres of the US-Mexican anti-drug effort represent a major blow to President Calderon's anti-drug campaign through which tens of thousands of troops and federal police across Mexico have been mobilised to combat violent drug cartels.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the reliability of Mexican police services to enforce law and order a score of 2.7 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'cannot be relied upon at all' and 7 'can always be relied upon').

Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008:
- Business executives give the police a score of 4.7 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt'), thus indicating the police as the most corrupt institution in Mexico.

Latinobarómetro: Annual Report 2008 (see English version):
- 55% of the respondents in this public opinion survey believe that it is likely or very likely to succeed in bribing a police officer.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 16.4% of the companies surveyed identified crime, theft and disorder as major constraints to doing business.

Licences, Infrastructure and Public Utilities

Individual Corruption

According to the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish), citizens perceive a wide range of public services dealing with licences and permits to be marked by corruption. Accessing and staying connected to public utilities, such as water and electricity, or getting one's garbage collected, may involve demands for bribes.

Business Corruption

Procedures for obtaining permits to open a business are perceived to be characterised by corruption and bribery. According to the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish), obtaining construction permits is perceived to be influenced by the payment of bribes. In the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, companies state that they expect to give gifts in order to obtain water connections, construction permits and operating licences. It should be noted that these complaints of corruption and bribery are not necessarily fuelled by a burdensome bureaucracy, as data from the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2010 reveals that the number of administrative procedures and hours spent on obtaining necessary permits for building a warehouse in Mexico are below the average for OECD countries.

Political Corruption

In a June 2009 article the newspaper México Migrante reported that the Mexican ambassador to China, in a letter to the National Secretary of the PAN, complained about the solicitation of a bribe to obtain a construction permit. The ambassador denounced a municipal employee affiliated with the PAN for reportedly extorting MXN 1 million from one of his family members. In the letter, the ambassador stated his will not to denounce the fact publicly, pending the July 2009 election, and added that the 'party comes first'.

According to CEI Consulting and Research 2005 (in Spanish), a lack of honesty and poor administration has resulted in huge efficiency losses in the development of infrastructure in Mexican states. The study ranks states on an 'Index of Honesty and Efficiency in Developing Public Infrastructure' according to their losses caused by maladministration during the last 30 years. Distrito Federal (Mexico City) is by far the worst performer on the index, as it has spent almost 6 times more on infrastructure projects than the value of what has actually materialised during these years. The best performers are the states of Michoacán, Jalisco, Baja California and Veracruz. The study is an indication of the serious problems of misappropriation of public funds in Mexico, a problem which seriously impedes the development of infrastructure for business operations.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- Starting a company requires the entrepreneur to go through 8 procedures, taking 13 days at a cost of almost 11.7% of income per capita.

- It takes 12 procedures, 138 days at 113.1% of the income per capita to obtain the necessary licences and permits, notifications and inspections and public utility connections to build a warehouse.

- It takes an average of 1.8 years to close a business at a cost of 18% of the estate.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give government administrative requirements (permits, regulations, reporting) in Mexico a score of 2.6 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely burdensome' and 7 'not burdensome at all').

Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008:
- Business executives give the registry and permit services a score of 4.1 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

KPMG: Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en Mexico 2008 (in Spanish):
- 32% of the companies surveyed pay bribes to obtain licences or permits and 47% of the respondents have experienced slower procedures if refusing to pay a bribe.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 62% of companies expect to give gifts in order to obtain an operating licence.

- 33.9% of the companies surveyed expect to give gifts to get a construction permit.

- The percentage of companies that expect to give gifts to obtain utilities connections is quite low, except in relation to obtaining a water connection, for which nearly 18% expect to give gifts.

Land Administration

Individual Corruption

Citizens report that they perceive the services of the public property registration service, Registro Público de la Probiedad, to be characterised by high levels of corruption. The Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish) reveals a high tendency of people being asked for bribes when applying for land use permits.

Business Corruption

According to the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2010, registering property in Mexico can be time-consuming and expensive. Compared to other Latin American countries, Mexico does not have an overly complex system for registering property. Nevertheless, in other OECD countries, the same process can be completed in less than half the time required in Mexico. The procedures vary from state to state within Mexico, with Campeche, Sonora and Nuevo León as the best performers, and Oaxaca, Morelos and Quintana Roo as the most difficult places to register property. Companies should note that there are indications that the process of registering property is in some states frequently affected by demands for bribes. According to a CEESP 2005 business survey (in Spanish), companies cite the public land registry agency as one of the most dishonest institutions at the municipal level.

Settling commercial disputes in court is made difficult by the weak and corrupt Mexican judiciary. According to the US Department of State 2009, disputes related to real estate transactions often occur in tourist areas and may take years to settle in Mexican courts. Companies should note that judges may decide to issue arrest warrants in commercial disputes over land issues, as commercial disputes are occasionally treated as criminal proceedings in Mexico.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- Registering property requires a company to go through an average of 5 administrative procedures taking an average of 74 days (more than double the OECD average) at a cost of 5.2% of the property value.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the protection of property rights in Mexico, including financial assets, a score of 4 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'very weak' and 7 'very strong').

Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish):
- Services of the Registro Público de la Probiedad are ranked 12th out of 35 public services (1 being 'the public service perceived to be least affected by corruption' and 35 'the public service perceived to be most affected by corruption').

Tax Administration

Individual Corruption

The Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2006 reveals that Mexican households perceive the payment of taxes and dealing with the tax authorities to be affected by corruption.

Business Corruption

The regulatory burdens concerning the payment of taxes have traditionally been a big disadvantage for investing in Mexico. However, World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2010 reveals that Mexico has made huge progress in reducing the amount of work related to paying commercial taxes in the country compared to previous years. For example, the number of payments that companies must make every year to the tax authorities has been cut to less than half of the average for OECD countries. Such a step may also contribute to reducing the possibility of tax officials to solicit bribes from companies. Still, however, the time spent preparing, filing and paying taxes is considerable. According to Global Integrity 2007, tax laws are not always enforced uniformly or without discrimination. The same source reports that Mexico's tax collection rate is the lowest among all the OECD countries. The Government of Mexico has tried to combat tax evasion and improve tax collection by establishing the Tax Service Administration (In Spanish), which has financial and political autonomy. However, there is uncertainty regarding its level of genuine political independence and efficiency.

Political Corruption

In an attempt to strengthen the fight against corruption and smuggling activities at the Mexican-US border, Mexico replaced more than 1,000 customs agents with newly-trained personnel in August 2009. According to the spokesman of the Mexican customs authority, this move would also improve tax collection, as nearly 50% of the country's Value Added Tax (VAT) was collected at customs.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- A company spends an average of 517 hours per year making 6 separate tax payments at a total tax rate of 51% of profits.

Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008:
- Business executives give the tax revenue authorities a score of 3.2 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

CEESP: Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en México 2007 (in Spanish):
- Taxes are perceived as the single greatest market-related obstacle by companies in Mexico.

- Companies give taxes a score of 4.2 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'no obstacle', and 7 being 'big obstacle').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- Nearly 10% of companies report that they expect to give gifts in meetings with tax inspectors.

Customs Administration

Individual Corruption

Citizens report that they have to pay bribes to transport goods through customs, including through port facilities. Customs services rank in the lower end of the Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish). The study ranks the provision of 35 public services after the likelihood of the occurrence of bribes.

The US Department of State 2008 writes about credible allegations of federal police, immigration and customs officials being involved in facilitating human trafficking.

Business Corruption

Companies should note that customs procedures in Mexico are generally more cumbersome than in other OECD countries and that the private sector occasionally complains about corruption in customs administration. According to Global Integrity 2007, Mexico's customs and excise laws are not always enforced uniformly or without discrimination. Cumbersome customs procedures are generally perceived to fuel the use of bribes, a tendency confirmed by the poor rating of the Mexican customs administration in surveys by the Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2005 and a CEESP 2005 business survey (in Spanish).

Political Corruption

There are allegations that corruption at the highest levels of local government and in the customs administration help facilitate the widespread illegal drug trafficking through Mexico. According to Global Integrity 2007, customs officials and the police are frequently accused of collaborating with drug traffickers and other organised criminal groups by members of the public and private sector. In an attempt to strengthen the fight against drug and weapons smuggling at the Mexican-US border, Mexico replaced more than 1,000 customs agents with 1,400 better-trained inspectors in August 2009. Mexican customs officials have often been accused of receiving illegal payments to turn a blind eye on drug smuggling activities, or for being drug cartels' payroll.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- A standard export shipment of goods requires 5 documents and takes 14 days at an average cost of USD 1,472 per container.

- A standard import shipment of goods requires 5 documents and takes 17 days at an average cost of USD 2,050 per container.

- The cost of both importing and exporting is significantly higher than the regional average.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the efficiency of customs procedures (formalities regulating the entry and exit of merchandise) in Mexico a score of 3.7 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'extremely efficient').

Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008:
- Business executives give the customs a score of 3.7 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish):
- Clearing goods through customs, including port facilities, is ranked 32nd out of 35 public services (1 being 'the public service perceived to be least affected by corruption' and 35 'the public service perceived to be most affected by corruption): 28.8% of this service's users have experienced corruption in its discharge.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- Less than 1% of companies expect to give gifts in order to obtain an import licence.

Public Procurement and Contracting

Business Corruption

Despite Mexico's comprehensive framework for public procurement, Global Integrity 2007 reports of loopholes and gaps between the well-developed legislation and actual practices. This gap is partly due to the federal structure of the political system in Mexico, since these laws apply only to federal procurement processes. Companies are likely to find less transparent procurement procedures and regulations in the states. For instance, companies prohibited from participating in procurement bids at the federal level are still permitted to bid and carry out procurement contracts with local governments. According to the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010, business executives report that it is fairly common in Mexico for public funds to be diverted to companies, individuals, or groups due to corruption. Business executives in the same report indicate that the decisions of government officials concerning contracts and policies frequently favour well-connected companies and individuals. This is backed by Transparency International Bribe Payers Index 2008 according to which more than a third of the business executives surveyed perceive the use of personal and familiar relationships on public contracting as very common among Mexican companies. Companies are recommended to use a specialised public procurement due diligence tool in order to mitigate the corruption risks associated with public procurement in Mexico.

See more on public procurement under 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section.

Political Corruption

As reported by the Coparmex magazine Entorno of March 2009, the awarding of contracts within Mexico's oil industry has always been opaque. Accordingly, employees of the state-owned oil company, Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), are well-known for channelling contracts to the state-controlled unions in exchange for kickbacks. After the awarding method was reformed in the 1960s, corrupt practices have become more subtle, and hence harder to detect. Reportedly, PEMEX employees now prefer to tip selected bidders about the size of the competing offers. In this way the preferred bidders can adjust their bids just enough to secure contracts. Moreover, the employees responsible for awarding contracts try to circumvent laws regulating conflict of interest; they award contracts to bidders that afterwards subcontract to companies in which the awarding employee has private interests.

Although improvements have been registered, observers report that corruption in public contracting is still significant in Mexico. Companies caught violating procurement regulations to secure public contracts are debarred from participating in future bids. However, a 2009 article by Fortuna, a business and finance magazine, reports that those sanctions do not work as deterrent and highlights that sanctions are often only applied after substantial delay (up to 5 years), after irregularities are detected.

See more on public procurement under 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the diversion of public funds to companies, individuals, or groups due to corruption a score of 2.9 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'very common' and 7 'never occurs').

- Business executives give the favouritism of government officials towards well-connected companies and individuals when deciding upon policies and contracts a score of 2.8 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'always show favouritism' and 7 'never show favouritism').

KPMG: Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en Mexico 2008 (in Spanish):
-16% of those companies surveyed mention 'winning a contract' as the motive for bribing public officials.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 10.5% of companies expect to give gifts in order to secure a government contract.

- The average value of a gift expected to secure a government contract is a little less than 0.4% of the value of the contract.

CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabillidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish):
- 15% of companies report that they have paid bribes to public officials in return for being awarded federal government contracts.

- 9% of companies report that they have paid bribes to public officials in return for being awarded a state or municipal government contract.

- 7% of companies believe that it is frequently required to pay a bribe in order to win a contract.

- 13% of companies believe that the result of a bidding procedure frequently depends on personal connections.

- 10% of companies report that winners of public contracts are frequently chosen before the actual bidding round.

Environment, Natural Resources and Extractive Industry

Business Corruption

Global Integrity 2007 reports that environmental regulations are not always enforced uniformly or in an even-handed manner. In a CEESP business survey 2005 (in Spanish), a significant number of companies report paying bribes to federal and municipal public officials in order to have violations of environmental laws and regulations ignored. This practice is most commonly found in the states of Aguascalientes, Campeche, Guerrero, Chihuahua, Michoacán and Nayarit.

A myriad of illegal loggers and logging companies operate in Mexico and the government estimates that illegal logging destroys 64,000 acres of Mexican forest each year, adding Mexico to the list countries that are losing their primary forests most rapidly. Environmental activists estimate that this figure is considerably higher, and Greenpeace reports that almost half the timber produced in Mexico is illegally harvested. Much of the illegal logging is carried out by well-organised logging gangs. According to an article by illegal-logging.info, rights groups say the leaders of logging gangs pay off police and judges to protect their interests, and are sometimes linked to kidnappings. President Calderon has declared a zero tolerance policy towards illegal loggers, but so far there are no reports of successful governmental measures in this field.

According to an October 2009 article by International Transport Workers' Federation, Mexico's oil industry, controlled by the state-owned company Pemex, is marked by endemic corruption, leading to life threatening working conditions and intimidations of workers. Pemex itself has experienced several corruption scandals and it is estimated that the company loses around USD 2 billion a year to pipeline corruption.

Political Corruption

In 2003, the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) fined the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) more than USD 90 million for diverting about USD 45 million from Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), Mexico's state-owned oil company, into the party's 2000 presidential campaign fund. According to Global Integrity 2007, the money first went to PEMEX's trade union and was subsequently withdrawn by PRI employees, who then deposited the money with the PRI.

According to Transparency International 2008, there are persistent problems in the water sector, such as opacity in water concessions and illegal siphoning of water and a lack of enforcement of the National Water Law. However, the National Water Commission (CONAGUA) began the implementation of the Operative Programme for Transparency and Combating Corruption (POTCC), a programme developed to improve accountability and reduce the opportunities for corruption in water administration. Reportedly, the programme has resulted in a significant increase in paying users and helped collect MXN 1.35 billion in unpaid fees between 2001 and 2006.

Still, however, news articles keeps reporting on irregularities in the water sector. For example, corruption and insufficient resources, both technical and financial, are according to WASH news Latin America and Caribbean, hindering the development of adequate wastewater treatment to the extent that it has been called 'one of biggest failures in Latin America'. Due to underinvestment in water sanitation facilities, big commissions are offered to private companies which, in turn, do not process the water adequately. In spite of the nearly 200 treatment plants around the country, only around 30% of wastewater is currently treated in Mexico. The situation is reportedly most serious in the states of Morelos and Puebla. As a response, President Calderón launched a USD 219 million national program in mid-2008 to stimulate the construction and operation of wastewater treatment plants.

Frequency

CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish):
- 13% of companies report that they have paid bribes to public officials in order to have violations of federal environmental laws and regulations ignored.

- 11% of companies report that they have paid bribes to public officials in order to have violations of municipal environmental regulations ignored.

Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives

• Legislation: Mexico ratified the OECD Convention in 1999 and the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) in 2004. The country also ratified the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption in 1997. These commitments are indicative of the strong anti-corruption legal framework in Mexico. Corrupt practices are addressed by the Código Penal Federal (in Spanish), which criminalises attempted corruption, passive and active bribery, extortion, bribing a foreign official, abuse of office and money laundering. Also, the National Agreement for Transparency (in Spanish) expands punitive measures in corruption cases, with average penalties of five to ten years imprisonment. Transparency International states in its Progress Report 2009 that Mexico has not actively enforced the OECD Convention. Mexico has no ongoing cases or investigations of foreign bribery and combined with issues such as unsatisfactory auditing standards and an inefficient legal system it leads to Mexico being classified under 'little or no enforcement'. Although Mexico is assessed by Global Integrity 2007 as having a strong legal framework, enforcement of legislation is problematic. Several cases of corruption have not been penalised due to lack of evidence and inefficiency within the judiciary. Nevertheless, the country has made great progress in increasing transparency by, for example, passing a Freedom of Information Act of 2002 (FIA, in Spanish, as amended in 2006) that ensures access to information for citizens at all government levels. The 6th principle of the constitution was also reformed in 2007, and access to information is now secured as a fundamental right of citizens. Although the aim with the constitutional amendment was to align the procedure at federal, state and municipal level with standards that have proven successful internationally, citizens are still likely to experience slow and complicated proceedings at state and local levels. The improved framework for access to information is a major step towards increased control over public spending and activities. However, according to some observers, the efficiency of the various laws aimed at increasing transparency is endangered in many ways, as judges and legislators often decide for themselves what is considered 'confidential' or 'reserved' information. The Congress and the judicial system have in fact for many years practised a 'closed files' policy. Access the Lexadin World Law Guide for a collection of legislation in Mexico.

• Government Strategies: During its first year in office, President Calderón's administration presented its Manifesto of Anti-Corruption Efforts, which focuses on six priority areas: accounting and fiscal reform, educational content, regulatory simplification, promotion of transparency, institutional accountability and the professionalisation of public service. To improve government efficiency, President Calderón has even launched a popular contest to find the most useless red tape and to suggest how to curb corruption and the waste of public resources in the best way. The legal and institutional strategy to combat corruption devotes special priority to prisons, the police force and customs sectors. The government has furthermore implemented several measures to make the business environment more appealing and transparent. For instance, it has established a Federal Competition Commission (CFC) active in fighting monopolies, and a new corporate tax reform (IETU) as an incentive to increase tax collection. The main purpose of the reform is to increase tax collection in order to become less dependent on oil revenues and to crack down on tax fraud and tax evasion stemming from the informal sector. A set of federal institutions and agencies has also been established (see below), the goal of which is to investigate and prosecute corruption within the public sector. In 2006, the Ministry of Public Administration released the Annual Operative Programme of the Professional Career Service (SPC), establishing guidelines for the service of the public administration and aiming to reduce discretionary authority and minimise irregular practices in hiring procedures. However, levels of corruption remain high in Mexico, and the effectiveness of the government's anti-corruption initiatives is disputed by several observers.

• Anti-Corruption Agencies: An increasing number of public agencies and initiatives have been dealing with anti-corruption in Mexico since the historical change of government in 2000, where the previous President Fox assumed power. Although this is a positive development and reflects growing political interest in curbing corruption, there has also been criticism based upon a still widespread executive dominance over the agencies, which limits their effectiveness. The majority of observers agree that the most prominent improvements have taken place within the area of public procurement. The relevant public institutions related to anti-corruption are listed below.

• Ministry of Public Administration: The Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP, in Spanish) has the lead on coordinating government anti-corruption policy. It has a mandate to investigate, prosecute and punish corruption within the federal public administration. The SFP mandate paves the way for strict corruption control in public tenders, where grand corruption is reportedly common. The SFP also works on further developing the Agenda for the Digitalisation of Public Administration (in Spanish), with the specific aim of enhancing its efficacy and transparency. Among other useful content, the SFP's website contains a list of companies that are blacklisted from participation in federal public contracts due to financial or procedural abuses in relation to previous bids (see 'Public Procurement' below) and links to other public institutions working with enhancing transparency and civil society participation to government's affairs. According to Global Integrity 2007, the efficiency of the SFP is reduced by a high degree of executive influence.

• Interministerial Commission for Transparency and the Fight Against Corruption: The Comisión Intersecretarial para la Transparencia y el Combate a la Corrupción (CITCC, in Spanish) was established at the federal level as an interministerial commission with the aim of coordinating actions to improve transparency, prevent bureaucratic abuse and curb corruption within the federal government. Among the programmes introduced by the CITCC is the Blindaje Electoral, which aims at preventing political abuse of public resources in election campaigns at both federal and local levels. The Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP, see above) and some state governments have signed an official agreement that obligates them to protect the programme, punish violations and encourage citizens to act as active observers and inspectors in the process (view the signatories of Blindaje Electoral).

• Federal Institute of Access to Public Information: The Instituto Federal de Acceso a la Información Pública (IFAI, in Spanish) was created in 2002 during the Fox administration and is another autonomous agency at the federal level that aims to improve transparency in relation to access and dissemination of public information. The main objectives of the IFAI are to secure equal access to public information, and to ensure that personal information is protected from federal government abuse. As to the first aim, the IFAI operates the INFOMEX portal (in Spanish), where citizens can request access to federal government information electronically. The IFAI is also in charge of solving conflicts between citizens and the government in relation to releasing or denying access to public information. According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, IFAI's powers are fairly limited; it can only obligate the federal government to provide information, and it has no mandate to prosecute if laws are violated. The judiciary, Congress, political parties and individual states are not obliged to show their public records to the IFAI.

• Tax Administration Office: The Servicio de Administración Tributaria (SAT) runs a Anti-Corruption Portal (in Spanish) which contains general information on SAT's transparency policies as well as a system to report alleged corruption within SAT and surveys monitoring the taxpayers perception of SAT's transparency. SAT has initiated several complaint mechanisms such as electronic reports, a free hotline and a system of red phones in customs and local tax offices directly linked to a call centre.
  

• Supreme Audit Office: The Auditoría Superior de la Federación (ASF, in Spanish) specialises in financial investigation and evaluation of government spending, including the judiciary, the executive, the legislature and other autonomous institutions and individuals that receive public federal resources. The ASF has displayed substantial independence in its activities and plays an important role in promoting accountability and transparency in public institutions. According to Global Integrity 2007, the government has acted on about 90% of the ASF's findings.

• National Human Rights Commission: The Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos (CNDH, in Spanish), established to deal with human rights violations, is equivalent to a human rights Ombudsman. The CNDH is a legally independent agency that has a well-educated staff and receives regular funding to support local commissions in each state. However, it is not secured from political interference in practice. In compliance with the National Agreement for Transparency (in Spanish), the CNDH publishes all of its reports. However, according to Global Integrity 2007, the reports are insufficient and there is no information on how complaints are processed after they have been received through the CNDH complaint mechanism (in Spanish). In its critical evaluation report on the CNDH (in Spanish) from February 2008, Human Rights Watch commented on several aspects of the CNDH's operations that could be improved. The CNDH can only issue nonbinding recommendations.

• Attorney General: The Procudaría General de la Republica (PGR) is responsible for the investigation and prosecution of federal crimes and has a specialised unit that pursues infringements of intellectual property rights (IPR). Despite strengthened enforcement by federal authorities, the PGR is still troubled by a weak legal framework for penalising IPR violations, its efforts aggravated by corruption and inefficiency in those agencies charged with fighting Mexico's rampant level of manufacturing piracy and counterfeiting. In October 2008, it was revealed that a major drug cartel had infiltrated the PGR and that five officials of the PGR's Organised Crime Unit had been arrested on allegations that they served as informants for a major drug cartel in exchange of monthly 'salaries' of USD 150,000 to USD 450,000.

• E-Governance: Mexico has made significant progress in computerising selected public services. This has reduced the number of citizens' and companies' encounters with frontline public officials and thereby reduced opportunities for corruption. The Ministry of Public Administration (Secretaría de la Función Pública, SFP, see above) has played a key role in implementing the automation of public services. Its website contains a list of useful links for companies, like the Compranet (online federal government procurement, in Spanish), Tramitanet (electronic processing of selected public services, in Spanish), and Declaranet (online filing of income taxes for federal employees, in Spanish). Normateca (in Spanish) provides information on government regulations and laws. For import regulations and information, please refer to the ProMexico portal under the Ministry of Economy.

• Public Procurement: The legal framework for transparent public procurement in Mexico is considered to be 'very strong' by Global Integrity 2007, having improved significantly due to increased oversight by the Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP, see above). The Ley de Adquisiciones, Arrandamientos y Servicios del Sector Público (in Spanish), the Ley Federal de Responsibilidades, Administrativas de los Servidores Públicos (in Spanish) and the Ley de Obras Públicas y Servicios Relacionados con las Mismas (in Spanish) address issues of conflict of interest among federal procurement officials, competitive bidding, asset declaration and monitoring, review of procurement decisions, as well as blacklisting measures. However, observers generally agree that public procurement still suffers from a range of problems and that corruption is still widespread (see 'Public Procurement and Contracting' in the Corruption Levels section). The federal government has established a portal for online tenders, Compranet (in Spanish), which lists procurement opportunities, bidding documents, and relevant laws and procedures. However, the portal only covers federal procurement. The decentralised structure of the Mexican political system poses a challenge to progress in the field of public procurement, and tender procedures at state and municipal levels are considerably less transparent than federal government tenders. Moreover, although violations of procurement law may lead to blacklisting of companies, Global Integrity 2007 reports that loopholes exist since a company can still sell to local governments if prohibited at the federal level, and vice versa. Blacklisted and sanctioned investors are added to sanctioned contractor and provider directive (in Spanish), administered by the Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). The government established a programme called Social Witness (in Spanish) in 2004 through which representatives from civil society attend federal procurement meetings with the task of assuring the process against irregularities. According to an OECD 2006 study, the programme has led to a 50% increase in biddings and an estimated saving of USD 26 million in its first 2 years of activity.

• Whistle-Blowing: The Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP, see above) coordinates a whistleblower mechanism on its website (in Spanish - see under Quejas) where citizens and companies can report cases of corruption through a twenty-four hour hotline, an e-mail system and postal mail. A federal law protecting informants reporting on corruption was presented to Congress in 2002, but rejected. According to Global Integrity 2007, no law protects whistle-blowers internally within the public administration. The Federal Tax Authority provides a system for electronic complaints (in Spanish) on acts of corruption by tax officers. The Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos (CNDH, see above) also has a complaint function (in Spanish) on its website, through which citizens can report human rights and corruption violations. Reportedly, corruption in the police forces and deficiencies in the system governing witness protection has led to several protected witnesses being killed. Most recently the former police officer Edgar Enrique Bayardo, who was arrested for collaboration with drug cartels, but turned into a protected informant, was killed in Mexico City in December 2009.

• General Comments on the Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives: Mexico has experienced an increase in anti-corruption activities since former President Vicente Fox assumed office in 2000. Fox placed 1,500 critical sectors (such as specific police units) under state surveillance, and he was the driving force behind the development of several institutions and laws aimed at improving the business climate and curbing corruption. Fox's successor, President Felipe Calderon, has continued the fight against corruption by means of important legal reforms, such as the passing of the Freedom of Information Act 2002 (revised in 2006), and cracking down on corruption in specific areas of the public administration. However, Calderon's anti-corruption drive, like that of Fox, is challenged by large parts of the population that question his legitimacy and by a political deadlock between the major political parties, which allegedly blocks the implementation and enforcement of anti-corruption measures. Furthermore, poor governance is pervasive in some Mexican states and local politicians are frequently accused of being involved in corruption and of collaborating with drug cartels and other organised criminal groups. Hence, in some cases, state sovereignty in the federal structure limits the impact of federal anti-corruption initiatives.

Private Anti-Corruption Initiatives

• Media: The media in Mexico has become more active in the field of anti-corruption. However, while irregularities and corruption at the political and administrative level have been revealed, serious investigative journalism is still underdeveloped in Mexico. Freedom House 2009 describes Mexico's press as 'free', but states that journalists are frequently subjected to violence when they investigate police issues, drug trafficking and corruption. Drug cartels largely ignore stories about cartel leaders, but the cartels are prompt to use violence to silence newspapers investigating corruption among collaborating police officers and politicians, as this threatens the cartels' networks of protection. This pressure has reportedly resulted in many journalists exercising self-censorship. Moreover, state-level politicians have used the weak and easily influenced judiciary to punish journalists writing about corruption and about politicians' alleged role in the trafficking of drugs and persons. Mexican politicians implicated in corruption cases have in the past frequently invoked libel laws. These criminal defamation laws were abolished in 2007 at the federal level, and states are now legally required to amend their legislation in the same way. In April 2009, the Lower House passed a law according to which offences against journalists will be treated as a federal offence, paving the way for higher protection of journalists' rights. However, the law requires the approval of the Senate before entering into force. Reporters Without Borders 2010 ranks Mexico 137th out of 175 countries, the lowest rank among the Latin American countries, except for Cuba. According to the source, the number of journalists killed in Mexico has fallen; however, increasing numbers of journalists are fleeing into exile. Freedom House 2009 ranks Mexico 115th out of 195 countries and describes the country's press environment as 'partly free'.

• Civil Society: The rights of association and assembly in Mexico are formally established and are generally respected. However, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010 the creation of independent organisations such as labour unions or peasent's organisations are often hindered by different means. Participation in trade unions, civic and political associations is relatively low compared to other Latin American countries, and many important NGO leaders and other types of civic organisations have been co-opted into federal as well as local government. However, Freedom House 2009 reports that NGOs are becoming more active in the public debate. Trade unions do not enjoy the same protected status as under the PRI, but politically connected union leaders still strike opaque deals with government officials.

• Transparencia Mexicana (in Spanish): This local chapter of Transparency International is very active, and its website contains many useful reports on corruption and anti-corruption in Mexico. Among other things, Transparencia Mexicana produces a Reputation Index (IMRE, in Spanish) of companies operating in Mexico, by which selected companies can see how they are perceived to perform according to different variables. Transparencia Mexicana also produces the very useful Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish), a survey ranking specific public services in different states according to their level of corruption. Transparencia Mexicana seeks to promote Integrity Pacts (in Spanish) between government institutions and companies with the aim of avoiding corruption and bribery in public tenders. Examples of such Integrity Pacts are the cases of the Integrity Pact on Electronic Toll Collection Systems, the Integrity Pact with the Public Safety Secretariat, and the Mexico Suburban Train project.

• Fundar, Centro de Análisis e Investigación (in Spanish): Fundar is an independent interdisciplinary research centre that aims at promoting citizen participation in society and strengthening democracy. Fundar is especially working with budget and policy analysis and have launched several projects focusing on access to information, accountability and transparency within public institutions. Three times a year Fundar issues the Boletín México Transparente and the centre has published a range of reports on different subjects such as budget transparency in Latin America and Mexico, oil revenues and public spending and the right of access to information in Mexico. Boletín México Transparente, the reports and several electronic bulletins are all available in Spanish on Fundar's website.

• Controlaría Ciudadana para la Rendición de Cuentas: The Controlaría Ciudadana (CC) is a civil society organisation that aims at strengthening the efficiency and transparency of public administration through the verification and control of public expenditure. The CC analyses the patterns that facilitate transparency and presents suggestions for bills. The CC also runs programmes specifically aimed at curbing corruption, such as, among others, the Alto a la Corrupción programme.

• Business Initiatives: The Mexican committee of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), ICC Mexico (in Spanish), has links to the ICC's manual on anti-corruption (code of conduct and recommendations for avoiding corruption). ICC Mexico provides arbitration in commercial disputes and also deals with issues of intellectual property rights (IPR). Another useful business initiative aimed at providing companies in Mexico with information on business practices and corruption is the Centro de Estudios Económicos del Sector Privado (CEESP, in Spanish). CEESP has produced a report on companies' experiences of corruption in Mexico (Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005, in Spanish) and has published a report on the costs of government regulation for companies in Mexico, Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en México 2007 (in Spanish). Also, KPMG published a 2008 survey, Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en México (in Spanish), concerning fraud and corruption and how these practices affect companies operating in Mexico.

Resources

The websites listed below provide useful facts on Mexico as well as contacts and tools for companies operating in Mexico:

• International Finance Corporation: Mexico SME Toolkit (in Spanish) and Latin America & the Caribbean SME Toolkit (in Spanish)
  Guide to sustainable business management practices for SMEs.
• Business Fighting Corruption
  An online resource centre for business on collective action to avoid corruption which contains a guide and resources for partnerships with companies and other stakeholders to fight against corruption.
• CIA World Factbook: Mexico Profile
• World Bank: Mexico Data Profile

Sources for further reading:

• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Mexico 2010.
• The World Economic Forum: Mexico Competitiveness Report 2009.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2009.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2009.
• KPMG: Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en México 2008 (in Spanish).
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2008.
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en México 2007 (in Spanish).

Conventions and Indices

OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Status: Deposit of Instrument of Ratification 27 May 1999. Entry into Force of the Convention 26 July 1999. Entry into Force of Implementing Legislation 18 May 1999.

This field describes the country's status on the OECD Convention on Bribery of Foreign Officials in International Business Transactions. Please note any declarations and reservations made upon ratification. View the list of signatories to the OECD Convention. Read more about the OECD Convention.

UNCAC Status: Signed 9 December 2003. Ratified 20 July 2004.

This field describes the country's status on the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Please note any declarations and reservations made upon ratification. The list of signatories can be found on the UNODC website. Read more about the UNCAC.

Other Relevant Conventions or Treaties:

• Inter-American Convention Against Corruption: Signed 29 March 1996. Ratified 27 May 1997.
  Read Transparency International's summary and assessment of the convention.

• United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime: Signed 13 December 2000. Ratified 4 March 2003. Read Transparency International's summary and assessment of the convention.

Transparency CPI: 2009: 89/180 (Score: 3.3)

Transparency CPI
This field consists of the score for the country in question on the Corruption Perceptions Index from Transparency International as well as its ranking.

World Bank CORR Index (-2.5 - +2.5): 2008: -0.26

World Bank Corruption Index
This field consists of the score for the country in question on the 'Control of Corruption' indicator in the World Bank Governance Research Indicator Country Snapshot (GRICS): 1996-2008.

OECD Country Risk Classification (0-7): 2010: 3

Country Risk Classification
The classification of countries by risk category has the aim of providing OECD countries with a basis for calculating the premium interest rate to be charged to cover the risk of non-repayment of export credits. Countries are placed in risk categories 0 - 7, with 0 being the lowest risk category and thus the least expensive. Conversely, premium group 7 is the highest risk category. Each classification is comprised of 2 components: 1) an assessment of the country's economic/financial situation, and 2) its overall political stability. Access the complete list of OECD Country Risk Classification figures.

Data Verification:

Latest update: December 2009

Data verified by: Global Advice Network

Information Network

Country Profile Sources

General Information Sources

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business in Mexico Subnational Report 2009.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2009.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2009.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2009.
• Latinobarómetro: Annual Report 2009.
• The Boston Globe: 'President's Party Loses Majority in Mexico Elections', 6 July 2009.
• The Huffington Post: 'Mexico Election: PRI Makes a Comeback', 6 July 2009.
• BBC News: 'US grafts adds to Mexico's woes', 30 March 2009.
• Al Jazeera: 'Mexico condemns US' Corruption', 6 March 2009.
• The Sidney Morning Herald: 'Corruption impedes Mexico drug fight', 28 February 2009.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2008.
• Latinobarómetro: Annual Report 2008 (see English version).
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Mexico 2008.
• Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008.
• KPMG: Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en México 2008 (in Spanish).
• Grant Thornton: Mexican Tax Reforms 2008.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2008.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2008.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Mexico 2008.
• Lexadin: The World Law Guide - Legislation Mexico 2008.
• The Guardian: 'Mexico: Ex-drug czar allegedly took cartel money', 23 November 2008.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2007.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• PricewaterhouseCoopers: Delitos Económicos: Gente, Cultura y Controles 2007 (in Spanish).
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2007.
• Centro de Estudios Economicos del Sector Privado (CEESP): Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en Mexico 2007 (in Spanish).
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• Financial Times: 'Cautious start to Mexico's overdue tax reform', 18 September 2007.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• BBC News: 'Q&A: Mexico election crisis', 8 September 2006.
• BBC News: 'Tightrope awaits Mexico's Calderon', 7 September 2006.
• BBC News: 'Mexico election protesters dig in', 2 August 2006.
• BBC News: 'Mexico election result', 7 July 2006.
• Transparencia Mexicana Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2005 (in Spanish).
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).
• Procuradoría de la República: Formas de Combate al Narcotráfico (in Spanish).
• BBC News: Mexico Country Profile.

Corruption Levels Sources

Judicial System

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Mexico 2010.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2009.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2009.
• Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008.
• Latinobarómetro: Annual Report 2008 (see English version).
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Mexico 2008.
• El Norte: 'Destapa Coparmex corrupción en juicios', 11 November 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2007.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2007.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en México 2007 (in Spanish).
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• Reuters: 'Police Corruption undermines Mexico's war on drugs', 23 May 2007.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2006.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).

Police

• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• BBC News: 'Mexican purge axes corrupt police', 12 November 2009.
• The Washington Post: 'Soldiers wary of often corrupt Mexican police', 9 November 2009.
• The Wall Street Journal: 'Mexico Cracks down on Local Police Corruption', 10 June 2009.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Mexico 2008.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2008.
• Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008.
• Associated Press: 'Mexico Reveals Drug Corruption Network', 28 October 2008.
• CNN World: 'Cartel Worker Reportedly Spied on DEA in Mexico', 27 October 2008.
• Associated Press: 'Mexico Outraged over Corrupt Police kidnappings', 22 August 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2007.
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en México 2007 (in Spanish).
• Los Angeles Times: 'Ex-governor of Mexican state is held', 22 June 2007.
• Reuters: 'Police corruption undermines Mexico's war on drugs', 23 May 2007.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2006.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).

Licences, Infrastructure and Public Utilities

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• México Migrante: 'Denuncia embajador corrupción panista', 30 June 2009.
• KPMG: Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en Mexico 2008 (in Spanish).
• Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2006.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• CEI Consulting & Research: Análisis Acumulado en la Generación de Infraestructura Pública en los Últimos 30 Años 2005 (in Spanish).

Land Administration

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Mexico 2008.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2008.
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).

Tax Administration

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2009.
• BBC News: 'Mexico in major customs shake-up', 17 August 2009.
• Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre el Costo de la Regulación Para las Empresas en México 2007 (in Spanish).
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2006.

Customs Administration

• The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010.
• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• BBC Mundo: 'Purga Anticorrupción en Aduanas de México', 17 August 2009.
• BBC News: 'Mexico in major customs shake-up', 17 August 2009.
• Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Mexico 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• Transparencia Mexicana: Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno 2007 (in Spanish).
• Los Angeles Times: 'Ex-governor of Mexican state is held', 22 June 2007.
• Reuters: 'Police corruption undermines Mexico's war on drugs', 23 May 2007.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2005.

Public Procurement and Contracting

• World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010.
• Fortuna: Contratación gubernamental, nicho de corrupción, June 2009.
• Coparmex: Entorno - March 2009 (in Spanish).
• KPMG: Encuesta de Fraude y Corrupción en Mexico 2008 (in Spanish).
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2004.

Environment, Natural Resources and Extractive Industry

• International Transport Workers' Federation: 'Corruption and repression in Mexico oil industry exposed', 30 October 2009.
• Petroleumworld: 'COHA: Mexico: An oil nation in crisis', 22 October 2009.
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2008.
• WASH news Latin America and Caribbean: 'Mexico: Corruption, insufficient funding hampering wastewater treatment, says AMDA Chairman', 28 January, 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• illegal-logging.info: 'Mexico murder shows grim face of illegal logging', 8 June 2007.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).

Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives Sources

• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Mexico 2010.
• US Department of State: Investment Climate Statement - Mexico 2009.
• Los Angeles Times: 'Witness in Mexico protection program killed', 3 December 2009.
• The Guardian: 'Mexico rewards citizens to expose corruption and red tape', 26 September 2009.
• Coparmex: Entorno - March 2009 (in Spanish).
• Transparency International: Global Corruption Report 2008.
• Human Rights Watch: 'Comisión de derechos humanos podría ser más efectiva', February 2008 (in Spanish).
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2008.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Mexico 2008.
• Lexadin: The World Law Guide - Legislation Mexico 2008.
• Associated Press: 'Mexico Reveals Drug Corruption Network', 28 October 2008.
• CNN World: 'Cartel Worker Reportedly Spied on DEA in Mexico', 27 October 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Reports 2007.
• Ernesto Villanueva: Whistleblowers and the Rule of Law in Mexico 2007.
• OECD: Mapping Out Good Practices for Promoting Integrity in Public Procurement 2006.
• CEESP: Encuesta sobre Gobernabilidad y Desarrollo Empresarial 2005 (in Spanish).

Private Anti-Corruption Initiatives Sources

• The Bertelsmann Foundation: Transformation Index - Mexico 2010.
• Reporters Without Borders: Mexico Country Report 2010.
• Freedom House: Freedom of the Press Index 2009.
• Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Mexico 2009.
• Reporters Without Borders: Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2009.
• US Department of State: Human Rights Report - Mexico 2008.
• Freedom House: Freedom of the Press - Mexico 2008.
• Global Integrity: Mexico Country Report 2007.
• Christian Science Monitor: 'Drug wars endanger Mexican Press', 12 June 2007.
• The World Bank Institute: Business Fighting Corruption.