This opinion follows up on my previous opinion of ("the Second Mayora Report") in the matter of "Railroad Development Corporation" (Claimant) v. "The Republic of Guatemala" (Respondent), ICSID Case No. ARB/07123. The scope of this third report ("the Third Mayora Report") is narrower than the two previous Mayora Reports. The main reason for this is that, in my opinion, the main legal questions concerning this matter have become sufficiently circumscribed. There are other issues of legal relevance than those I try to elucidate here but their bearing on the substance of this matter is very limited.
2. The main legal questions can be classified in three categories: (i) those related to the notions of interests of the state and of legality; the nature of lesividad (injuriousness): its essence and elements; (ii) those related to whether the fundamental elements of the notions of due process and of the equal protection of the laws are violated in general by the lesividad, and in particular by the way it is regulated under Guatemalan law; and (iii) those concerned with the alleged lack of presidential approval of Contracts 143 and 158.
3. In my opinion these main legal questions are not considered in sufficient depth in the report prepared by Mr. Juan Luis Aguilar Salguero dated October 1, 2010 ("the Aguilar Report"). By this I mean that, the Aguilar Report fails to address the ultimate implications of the contentions or assertions contained in it concerning what I have called "the main legal questions of this matter". Of course, I am only referring to the law of Guatemala and to the bearing that it has on this case, not to the legal questions arising under CAFTA, the law of international treaties, or to substantive international law.