In theory, the transitory articles in Mexican constitutional amendments are self-executing temporary orders designed to insure that the amendment is actually implemented. In other words, they are transitory: once executed, they are obsolete
To my lay eye, some of the transitory articles in the proposed Panista energy reform do not look particularly transitory. The notable offenders are articles 4, 5, 6, 11, and 16. It would logically appear that either they are not transitory, or they are close to meaningless, the Mexican equivalent of a signing statement.
Other transitory articles, it would seem, are transitory in that they refer to a single Congressional implementing action ... but it would also seem that some of them should not actually be transitory. For example, Article 9 gives Pemex a preference as an operator over other companies. Except, well, if its transitory then future Congresses could change the resulting law, no?
Finally, Article 7 requires both the current president and the next one to execute a ten-year program designed to take the federal government’s dependency on oil revenues from today’s ~59% of current revenues to half of the investment earnings of the Oil Fund. I guess that is transitory, but over 10 years? Moreover, after those ten years the 50%-of-Fund-earnings appears to be a permanent cap. So why is that not in the main text?
Transitory articles are not mentioned in the body of the Constitution, so no help there. Which must mean one of three things. (1) Transitory articles are not really transitory; (2) Transitory articles are transitory, but contain a lot of meaningless verbiage; or (3) I am really not understanding something.
The answer is (3), of course. Are there any lawyers here who can explain?