Maya Train Legal Battles Drag On Amid Delays

Mexico — Plaintiffs in lawsuits against the construction of the Maya Train, a flagship infrastructure project of former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s administration, are demanding an assessment of hidden defects in a megaproject that is already operational. They are also seeking to prohibit the transportation of dangerous goods along its route.

A Five-Year Legal Battle with No Resolution

The first attempt to hold a hearing occurred on June 4, 2025, followed by another on July 10. Five years after filing injunctions against the Maya Train over environmental concerns, the legal proceedings have yet to begin. Authorities, including the Ministry of Environment and the National Fund for Tourism Development (Fonatur), claim they have not received evidence submitted by opponents, despite the documents being digitized and even delivered on a CD to their offices.

Court records state that while "all expert reports submitted in these proceedings are digitized and therefore accessible in the electronic file," there is "no record proving that all responsible authorities have been notified of the June 3, 2025, agreement, which sent a digital reproduction of all expert reports provided by the plaintiffs."

Ángel Sulub, a resident of Felipe Carrillo Puerto in Quintana Roo and one of the plaintiffs, put it bluntly: "They are preventing the trial from starting by claiming they haven’t seen the evidence sent to them a year ago." Now, he and fellow plaintiffs fear the same outcome when the hearing is postponed to August 18—potentially the third delay.

Multiple Lawsuits Against a Controversial Project

EL PAÍS spoke with plaintiffs and lawyers involved in at least nine active injunctions against the Maya Train, a 1,544-kilometer rail network stretching from Palenque, Chiapas, across the Yucatán Peninsula.

During construction, the project faced accusations of bypassing environmental laws, sparking social conflicts, causing pollution—including deforestation, damage to cave systems and cenotes, and ecosystem disruption—and incurring cost overruns. Initially budgeted at 150 billion pesos, expenditures had ballooned to nearly 500 billion pesos by the end of 2024.

The Ministry of Environment’s legal department denied allegations of delaying tactics, stating, "It is incorrect to claim that a strategy of delaying injunction proceedings is being applied." They accused plaintiffs of "practices bordering on judicial abuse," citing nearly 30 injunctions and an equal number of amended complaints.

Judicial Obstacles and Government Defiance

Viridiana Maldonado, a lawyer with Territorios Diversos para la Vida, represents plaintiffs in two general injunctions. One challenges the violation of Indigenous communities' right to free, prior, and informed consent, while the other contests environmental damage caused by the project’s piecemeal approvals rather than a comprehensive evaluation.

Maldonado recounted procedural hurdles: "When we filed the lawsuit in June 2020, it was bounced between four courts, none willing to take responsibility—likely due to the pressure of presiding over a case against the Maya Train." After two years, a collegiate tribunal ordered a court in Campeche to handle the case, only for case files to go missing, requiring months to reconstruct.

Injunctions, a legal mechanism allowing citizens to challenge unconstitutional government actions, typically suspend infrastructure projects pending resolution. However, construction of the Maya Train continued despite suspensions, leaving courts to adjudicate a project already in operation.

Allegations of Intimidation and Government Pressure

Rómel González, a member of the Xpujil Indigenous and Popular Regional Council and a plaintiff in one injunction, described a campaign of intimidation: "We were criminalized—insulted on social media, reported to the Attorney General’s Office, robbed of our computers, accused in presidential press conferences of taking money from the U.S., and offered jobs and money by Fonatur to drop the lawsuits."

The Center for Mexican Environmental Law (CEMDA) is pursuing two active injunctions against Sections 5 North and 5 South, which run from Cancún to Tulum. Originally planned alongside a highway, the route was shifted inland, cutting through Quintana Roo’s cave and cenote system—a move opponents allege was made under pressure from hoteliers.

Aarón Hernández, CEMDA’s regional director for the Southeast, criticized courts for excessive formalism: "They’ve used every trick in the book to stall—demanding endless copies of documents, requiring signatures to be ratified repeatedly."

Ongoing Construction Despite Court Orders

Though courts granted multiple suspensions across nearly all sections of the project, López Obrador ordered construction to proceed. In May 2023, a Yucatán district court definitively halted deforestation in Sections 3, 4, 5 North, and 6, but the government ignored the ruling.

Despite multiple inaugurations, work continues. In April 2025, President Claudia Sheinbaum announced plans to adapt the infrastructure for freight transport, including 10 cargo complexes, five new terminals, and 70 kilometers of new or rehabilitated tracks. The first terminal, in Progreso, will clear 259 hectares of forest and include a hazardous waste storage facility, National Guard housing, a customs building, and fuel storage areas.

Plaintiffs’ Demands

Hernández of CEMDA stated their current goal: "Realistically, we want to force the Mexican government to carry out proper environmental remediation and ensure the freight train cannot transport hazardous substances or hydrocarbons—a spill in Quintana Roo could contaminate the entire aquifer."

González of Calakmul called for a full review of the project for hidden defects caused by rushed construction. Maldonado hopes for a halt to construction and environmental restoration.

Sulub, the plaintiff, summed it up: "We want authorities to follow the law, allow the constitutional hearing, and do their jobs."

Fonatur, when asked about the injunctions, responded that it "does not have the requested information" and lacks an official spokesperson on the matter.