- Mexico passed reforms for judges to be elected
- Critics fear judiciary independence is at risk
- Corruption, nepotism in courts remain concerns
Mexico’s senate has passed a judicial overhaul to see judges elected by popular vote.
The reforms have elicited conflicting views. Supporters claim that they will hold judges more accountable and highlight the possibility of the people voting for those responsible for providing justice. Critics argue that this weakens the nation’s system of checks and balances by weakening the judiciary’s independence.
Here is what we know as Mexico prepares to execute the reforms.
What are the primary goals of Mexico’s judicial reforms?
The law seeks to shift the judiciary from an appointment-based system, focusing on training and qualifications, to one in which citizens elect judges.
According to the administration, the primary purpose of these changes is to eliminate corruption in Mexico’s courts and ensure that they answer to the people’s will.
A measure implementing the reforms was adopted by two-thirds of the upper house of parliament on Wednesday, following a tense all-night discussion. The lower house adopted the reforms earlier this month.
Citizens will elect all federal and state judges, from lower courts to the Supreme Court. There are around 7,000 positions in all.
The criteria for becoming a judge have also been decreased.
A law degree and five years of experience are adequate for all judges, except those serving on the Supreme Court, who must have ten years.
The revisions will also replace professional tests presently used to assess candidates. The new reform needs strong grades and letters of recommendation.
Candidates must produce five letters of recommendation from neighbors, coworkers, or others confirming their suitability for the position. Candidates must also submit a three-page essay justifying their reasons for applying.
The first election, which will include approximately half of the judges, is scheduled for June 2025. The rest should coincide with the regular elections in 2027. However, many details about how the voting would be conducted remain unclear.
When these reforms are implemented, about 7,000 present judges will lose their jobs but can compete as candidates. However, many newly elected judges may be thrust into specialty courtrooms they have never seen before, posing a potentially tricky task.
How are judges currently selected in Mexico?
Judges are currently promoted to positions in higher courts through regular reviews.
The upper house of parliament selects Supreme Court members from a president-proposed shortlist.
“It is a fundamental reform,” Lopez Obrador declared on Thursday. “It reinforces that Mexico has a true democracy, where people elect their representatives, not elites or oligarchies. “Everyone, every citizen,” he said.
The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of whether legislation and authority follow the Constitution.
Is there an issue with justice in this country?
Experts acknowledge that the current judicial system has corruption issues. Surveys also show that Mexicans have little to no trust in the justice system.
However, analysts agree that the issues are more severe at the municipal rather than federal levels.
“There were no known major corruption cases [at the federal level],” Arturo Ramos Sobarzo, head of the Center for Investigation and Legal Informatics at the Escuela Libre de Derecho in Mexico City. “Of course, there were issues, and they were resolved. Most of the criticism was directed at the municipal level. There were lower salaries and a more critical attitude of the court.”
According to Mexico Evalua, a research organization that studies government policies, Mexico’s legal system had high impunity in 2022. The index identifies the system’s ability to respond effectively to the cases it handles. A high level of impunity results in a low rate of appropriate convictions and cases being taken to trial.
According to the research, the crimes with the highest level of impunity included intentional homicides, femicides, sexual abuse, disappearances, and kidnapping.
In the case of intentional homicide, the national average for impunity was 95.7%.
However, studies show that more than just cases before courts do not result in justice, reportedly due to corrupt judges. In Mexico, more than 90 percent of crimes are never prosecuted.
One of the most significant challenges is prosecutors’ desire and capacity to conduct investigations.
Nepotism is another critical issue; some experts believe it is a significant concern in the legal system. According to recent research, 37% of judicial officials have at least one family member who works in the courts.
Given these hurdles, why are these measures so contentious?
Experts argue that the reform fails to address the basic faults with the current system and prosecutors, who usually need more proper training and are overburdened by their workload.
They further emphasize that the new election method for judges still needs to be clarified and loaded with difficulties.
Will voters take the time to read and examine the resumes of the hundreds of relatively unknown applicants who could compete for each position? Who will be funding the candidates’ election campaigns? How many candidates will be on each ballot? These are all unresolved questions.
Miguel Angel Toro Rios, head of the School of Social Sciences and Government at Tecnologico de Monterrey, a Monterrey-based university, believes that the judicial system in Mexico is ineffective.
He pointed out that the reforms must address the major concerns facing the court system, prosecutors, the police, and the National Guard.
These issues may include corruption and, in many situations, chronic underfunding.
Different judges may not necessarily be better qualified to deal with the same issues if all other factors stay constant. Toros Rios explained that it appears to be a lot of work for little policy gain.
Experts also fear that the new procedure would be corrupted by corruption.
According to Adriana Delgado, director of Azteca Opinion at TV Azteca, a Mexican multimedia conglomerate, citizens usually turn to local state courts for concerns such as femicides and civil and criminal cases.
However, more needs to be resolved, and political rather than technical disagreements have hampered this judiciary reform.
Delgado said that the reform modifies how judges and magistrates are elected by public vote, raising concerns about the potential infiltration of organized crime or the influence of political and commercial interest groups in the selection process.
Could voting influence the work of the judges?
According to lawyer Ramos Sobarzo, these amendments put the court system in a difficult situation.
Depending on the voting results, elected justices on the Supreme Court of Justice would serve terms of eight, eleven, or fourteen years each. Those who receive the most votes will have a lengthier term in office.
He continued, ” We are quite concerned because it will damage judicial independence in numerous ways, leaving part or all of it to popular opinion.”
“What will happen…?” They will consider how to get re-elected in the seventh and eighth years.
“At that point, they may decide based on the popularity of a certain case rather than the incentives of examining the case files. They will decide how the people accept it,” he said.
The ruling party claims that enabling voters to choose judges would make them more accountable to the public and make it easier to punish bad ones.
Aside from judicial voting, what other issues do the reforms address?
The revisions will appoint “anonymous judges” to monitor organized crime cases, protecting their identities from retaliation, intimidation, or pressure.
They will also cut the Supreme Court’s size from 11 justices to nine.
They would also establish a judicial disciplinary commission with the jurisdiction to investigate judicial misconduct such as bribery, mishandling of evidence, excessive delays, and judges’ legal reasoning.
This issue is equally concerning to specialists.
We are concerned about this move because it needs to create clear rules. It makes it very simple and accessible to file complaints against federal judges and magistrates, influencing judicial independence. Sobarzo indicated that if a judge rules against a government appointment, this court (the disciplinary committee) could intervene.
How will this affect Mexico’s legal system in the short term?
This is a significant change in a short amount of time.
In less than a year, on June 1, the election for half of the whole court, including the Supreme Court, will be held.
Aside from the difficulty of organizing such a significant election, experts think Mexicans may notice an immediate influence on justice once this change is implemented.
“I think they will feel the immediate impact because this reform likely implies a salary reduction for judiciary members,” Sobarzo told the crowd.
The reform suggests that no minister, magistrate, or judge gets a larger salary than the president.
“Invest in your future with Webull UK – get started with free shares.”
According to rumors, a Supreme Court of Justice member earns more than $10,000 each month. 2018 Lopez Obrador stated that the president’s monthly income was around $5,613.
The most incredible people will eventually leave, as Sobarzo indicated.
However, Toros Rios predicted that little would change for ordinary citizens and their legal conflicts.
“It is not entirely obvious that everyday citizens will be affected,” Toros Rio told the press.
“Except if things benefit certain real powerful interest groups… they will probably be able to convince or fund the campaign of some of these judges, such that those judges will rule in favor of many of them,” said the judge.
Are there any other concerns?
The markets have fluctuated due to the arguments and controversies surrounding judicial reforms, and some analysts have cautioned that uncertainty about the country’s legal system may deter potential investors.
The United States, Mexico’s most significant economic partner, has also expressed alarm about the reforms, describing them as “a major risk” to Mexico’s democracy. Canada, Mexico’s second-largest trading partner, has also stated that investors are concerned that the reform could cause volatility.
Other experts believe that Mexico’s potential as an investment destination will remain the same.
“We’ve seen businesses worldwide function in some of the worst countries for human rights, government quality, and authoritarian governments. They don’t care as long as earnings can be produced and the rules are clear,” Toros Rios stated.
“When there is confusion regarding the rules, investors will cease investing. “Once the new rules are in place and investors have a better understanding of what they’re dealing with, things will be more or less the same as they are now,” he said.
First public greeting in two years from Royal Family wishes Prince Harry happy birthday
