US potato imports barred over security, sovereignty concerns

A federal judge barred the import of fresh potatoes from the United States today on national security and biosecurity grounds.

The decision, made by José Francisco Pérez Mier of the Seventh District Court in Los Mochis, Sinaloa — a potato-producing state, overturned a 2016 decision adopted by the Secretariat of Agriculture (Sagarpa) to allow potato imports from Mexico’s northern neighbor.

The judge said that Sagarpa’s reform to the Federal Law on Plant Health was unconstitutional because it didn’t include measures to protect against the introduction of plant diseases and therefore posed a threat to national sovereignty and security and crops such as chiles, tomatoes, eggplants and tobacco.

The domestic potato industry could disappear if fresh potato imports from the United States continue, Pérez said.

The amparo or injunction he handed down said the lack of protective measures “implies an imminent risk of plagues spreading on national soil.”

Pérez also accused the federal government of favoring government-subsidized United States potato farmers instead of supporting local production of the vegetable.

The judge said that would cause Mexico to become food dependent on a “foreign power,” namely the United States.

Pérez described the U.S. as “a power that in recent times has institutionalized hostile policies towards Mexico and on the supposition that it comes to dominate the national market, it will be the only supplier of the tuber.”

He added that “the entry of fresh potatoes from the United States violates the human right to food, is contrary to national sovereignty established by article 39 of the constitution and threatens national security by causing food dependence.”

It is the second time that an injunction banning potato imports from the United States has been handed down.

Following today’s ruling, a Supreme Court judge called on his colleagues to intervene in the case and make a definitive decision to avoid further legal back-and-forth actions that would result from the government appealing the ban.

Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena took up the cause of agricultural producers from the northeast of the country by suggesting that the government’s previous appeals be reviewed by Mexico’s highest court.

At least three of the five justices of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court must support his proposal in order for a hearing of the case to proceed.

If the Supreme Court doesn’t assume jurisdiction, it will be up to an administrative court in Culiacán, Sinaloa, to make a definitive ruling.

Source: El Universal (sp), Reforma (sp)

Have something to say? Paid Subscribers get all access to make & read comments.
NL Gov. S. García

Gov. García, already in ‘party mode,’ offers free beer at Monterrey’s World Cup Fan Fest

0
While other major cities across the nation are banning alcohol at their World Cup Fan Fests, alcoholic drinks will be sold at the Monterrey event, and, according to the governor, beer will be free.
Mexico City Stadium

Mexico City’s box seat owners kept their seats at the World Cup — but they’ll pay dearly to eat in them

0
If they want to eat and drink, box owners will be forced to purchase "hospitality packages" directly from FIFA, which reportedly cost US $75,000 for 12 people for all five World Cup matches at Mexico City Stadium.
estela de luz protest

Activists climb a Mexico City monument to proclaim that human rights are ‘also in play’

1
The choice of the phrase "in play" (en juego) in reference to human rights was seemingly meant to call attention to how little notice they are getting compared to the World Cup games.
BETA Version - Powered by Perplexity