Xcaret Mandated to Stop Using Maya Cultural Symbols in Parks and Hotels

In a landmark decision that could reshape how Mexico’s tourism industry interacts with indigenous communities, the Supreme Court has ordered Grupo Xcaret to stop using Maya cultural elements in its parks, hotels, and advertising.

The ruling stems from a 2022 complaint filed by El Gran Consejo Maya de Quintana Roo, which represents Maya communities in the state. The council accused the company of cultural appropriation by incorporating sacred and traditional elements into its theme parks and promotional materials without community consent. Among the disputed symbols are the Hanal Pixán celebration, the Maya ball game, the sacred Maya voyage, and the dance of the owls.

However, in a recent press statement posted on their website, El Gran Consejo Maya de Quintana Roo has announced that it is willing to work with Grupo Xcaret to continue using certain cultural elements. How this would work exactly has not been disclosed. 

The case reached the Supreme Court after Grupo Xcaret obtained a court order in February 2025 allowing it to continue using these cultural elements while the main lawsuit was being resolved. The Supreme Court has now revoked that suspension.

Justice María Estela Ríos González based the court’s decision on a September 2024 constitutional reform that recognizes the autonomy of indigenous peoples to preserve and protect their cultural heritage, both material and intangible. It also establishes that indigenous communities hold collective intellectual property rights in their heritage, meaning Maya culture is not in the public domain and cannot be freely exploited.

The ruling emphasizes that any use of these cultural elements requires the free, prior, and informed consent of the indigenous peoples who created and maintain them. The court stated that all indigenous cultural heritage is reserved for the corresponding communities, and its use is prohibited unless they grant permission.

Grupo Xcaret has said it maintains a respectful relationship with the Grand Maya Council and will await the court’s final decision before assessing any adjustments needed to its operations. The company had previously argued it had authorizations from other communities. Still, the current ruling prioritizes the claim of the Quintana Roo council, which state law recognizes as the representative of Maya indigenous peoples in the region.

While this Supreme Court decision is a temporary measure and does not resolve the underlying lawsuit, its implications could be significant for tourism in Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula. 

The decision could also open broader questions for businesses that employ Maya symbolism as central to their commercial offerings. The ruling against Xcaret, the most visible company in the sector, may set a precedent for future claims by indigenous communities against hotels, restaurants, and other tourism developments operating under similar practices.

For Maya communities, the ruling represents both a symbolic and legal victory. It affirms that indigenous cultural heritage cannot be used for commercial purposes without authorization from the communities that originated it. The case may begin a wider discussion about who benefits from the tourist exploitation of an ancient culture and under what conditions.

On the other hand, while the rights of indigenous peoples over their culture are now enshrined in the constitution and legal precedent, there are concerns that potential financial agreements will only benefit members of indigenous councils.