**Alito Accuses Pérez Dayán of Bowing to Pressure; Minister Denies Allegations; Judicial Workers Label Him a ‘Traitor’**
Alberto Gelacio Pérez Dayán, a minister of Mexico’s Supreme Court, finds himself in hot waters following accusations and controversies surrounding a recent court decision. On November 5, 2024, the Supreme Court’s full bench rejected a verdict proposal concerning constitutional actions by opposition parties against reforms to the Federal Judiciary. Pérez Dayán was among four dissenting votes in a majority decision that discarded the proposed ruling.
Minister Pérez Dayán has vehemently denied facing political pressure or having any ongoing legal investigations. In an interview, he stated, “I simply decided based on my previous stances. There are no complaints or investigation files against me, that’s false… I would be saddened to resolve something that contradicts my beliefs.” He emphasized the importance of a court that steadfastly interprets the constitution without political influence.
Meanwhile, Rafael Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, also known as “Alito,” leader of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), questioned Pérez Dayán’s motives through social media. He speculated if the minister was coerced into changing his stand and urged him to resist external pressures. “In one of the most significant sessions in the history of the Supreme Court, we’ve witnessed an unusual procedural shift by Minister Pérez Dayán, enabling the ruling party’s reform to potentially dismiss all judges across the country through what he described as a raffle,” Moreno Cárdenas wrote.
Allegations against Pérez Dayán extend beyond political maneuvering. Reports surfaced recently of misconduct accusations, suggesting legal challenges ahead. Media outlets claimed that complaints of sexual harassment against Pérez Dayán were filed with the Mexico City Prosecutor’s Office, a claim which he has denied. However, Alito expressed skepticism, hinting at growing doubts post the recent court session about whether Pérez Dayán has been “pressured.”
Inside the Supreme Court, Pérez Dayán argued that dismissing the judicial reform would be illogical and maintained that serious debate within the court should avoid irrational judgments. He lamented the sidelining of true constitutional discussions in favor of personal agendas.
Outside the court, protestors labeled Pérez Dayán a ‘traitor’ for his vote, calling for transparency and allegiance to the judiciary’s independence.
—
**Secondary Article: Legal and Political Implications Increase Tensions in Mexico**
The tensions between Mexico’s executive branch and the judicial system have been exacerbated by recent developments. A divisive reform spearheaded by the ruling government aims to overhaul Mexico’s Federal Judiciary System, sparking fierce debate and legal scrutiny. The controversy ignited further following the Supreme Court’s dismissal of an opposition-backed proposal to block these reforms.
Opposition parties, including the National Action Party (PAN) and Citizens’ Movement (MC), argue the reforms compromise judicial independence by introducing mechanisms that could see judges removed randomly rather than through meritocratic assessments. While proponents assert the reforms are necessary to enhance efficiency and reduce corruption within the judiciary, critics see it as an encroachment on the judiciary’s autonomy by the executive.
Adding to the drama, accusations of misconduct against key judicial figures, including Minister Pérez Dayán, threaten to sour public confidence in the judiciary and sway political calculations. Legal analysts are watching closely as these issues may trigger a potential judicial showdown or catalyze further reform stipulations.
In this politically charged environment, the role of the judiciary as an impartial arbiter is more crucial than ever. Observers foresee upcoming judicial elections and appointments as pivotal events that could reshape the contours of Mexico’s institutional balance of power in the coming years. As calls for honesty and integrity in court decisions resound, the Supreme Court remains at the heart of a constitutional storm with broader implications for democratic governance in Mexico.