Vance Center Submits Amicus Brief to Guatemala’s Constitutional Court to Uphold Anti-Corruption Policies

On September 3, 2025, the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice of the New York City Bar Association along with a group of civil society organizations – Acción Ciudadana, Centro Internacional para Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos, Diálogos A.C., Asociación Consejo Nacional Empresarial, and Involúcrate Guatemala – filed an amicus curiae brief to the Constitutional Court of Guatemala for the Case Regarding Governmental Agreement Number 133/2024. 

The amicus brief argues that Guatemala’s Constitutional Court should issue a ruling declaring an earlier action of partial unconstitutionality without merit and upholding the constitutionality of the Agreement’s Article 9(d)(ii), which ensures greater transparency and oversight for public contracting processes and expenditures.

See the full amicus brief here. 

Background 

The case concerns recent policies enacted by Guatemala’s executive branch to strengthen transparency and oversight over public spending as part of broader efforts to combat corruption in the country. 

Beneficial ownership transparency helps address loopholes that enable serious financial crimes. Without it, criminal actors can more easily exploit anonymous shell companies and complex ownership structures to launder illicit funds from corrupt sources, drug trafficking, and tax evasion, while helping criminal actors evade sanctions and hide their activities and assets from authorities. 

In December 2024, the Guatemalan government introduced a series of legislative initiatives to enhance beneficial ownership transparency. These measures included Governmental Agreement 133-2024, which mandates the disclosure of “partners and shareholders of legal entities” in order for companies to participate in public procurement processes. 

On June 13, a Guatemalan citizen filed a constitutional challenge to the Agreement. The petitioner argued that a provision requiring companies that wish to participate in public procurement proceedings to provide documentation of shareholders and individuals with financial and decision-making control over the companies violated fundamental constitutional rights, including the right to privacy of information and freedom of industry, commerce, and labor. The petition requested that the Court declare Article 9(d)(ii) unconstitutional. 

On June 24, the Court ruled to provisionally suspend Article 9(d)(ii). It is now considering whether that suspension will remain in effect.  

Conclusions 

The New York City Bar Association through the Vance Center filed the amicus curiae brief along with civil society organizations Acción Ciudadana, Asociación Centro Internacional para Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos, Diálogos A.C., Asociación Consejo Nacional Empresarial, and Involúcrate Guatemala.  

The brief argues that Agreement 133-2024 is constitutional and consistent with international anti-corruption standards, including the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the Inter-American Convention against Corruption (IACAC). 

“The Court’s provisional suspension of Article 9(d)(ii) of Governmental Agreement 133-2024 undermines Guatemala’s credibility in leading regional transparency efforts and places it at odds with its binding commitments under international frameworks,” the brief states. “By halting reforms designed to identify beneficial owners and strengthen oversight in public procurement, the Court’s ruling risks signaling institutional resistance to transparency and weakening Guatemala’s standing in the global fight against corruption.” 

The brief, coordinated by the Vance Center’s Institutional Integrity Program, provides a comparative and international legal analysis in support of the Agreement’s constitutionality.  

“Governmental Agreement 133-2024 is permissible, reasonable, and necessary in a democratic context that demands integrity in public administration,” it states. 

The brief surveys international norms and trends in anti-corruption legislation, observing that “beneficial ownership registries have become mainstream” as more governments and policymaking bodies have committed to upholding these standards. 

The brief also notes that beneficial ownership transparency is a “cornerstone of modern anti-corruption frameworks,” citing intergovernmental entities including the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the World Bank, and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), a global financial crime watchdog. It cites Guatemala’s status as a party to international treaties that impose obligations to combat corruption and potential consequences of this decision for the country’s economy. 

In conclusion, the New York City Bar Association, as amicus curiae, requests that the Court declare without merit the action of partial unconstitutionality filed in June. By doing so, the Court will uphold the Agreement’s validity, thereby strengthening transparency and anti-corruption efforts in Guatemala and aligning the country with international standards.  

See the full amicus brief here. 

The brief is also available in Spanish.