**AMLO Criticizes Judges for Attempting to Halt Judicial Reform in Congress**
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has openly criticized judges and members of the Federal Judicial Power (PJF) for what he describes as a “factional intrusion” in the legislative process. During a recent press conference, the president voiced his frustration over the perceived judicial intervention, stating, “How is it possible that they want to stop the legislative process? It is a blatant, arbitrary invasion of the legislative power’s authority.”
The controversy stems from an incident on August 31, 2024, when Martha Eugenia Magaña López, the head of the Fifth District Court in the State of Morelos, issued a provisional suspension order. This order directed the Chamber of Deputies not to begin discussions or voting on the proposed judicial reform. The reform, previously approved by the Constitutional Points Commission of San Lázaro, was perceived to negatively impact the four federal judges who had filed for protection.
Magaña López argued that the approval of the reform would lead to the dismissal of federal judges without a hearing or compensation, effectively threatening their tenures. Another judicial authority, Felipe Consuelo Soto, granted an indirect amparo to judges opposing the judicial reform, allowing the legislative process to continue but preventing the final decree from being sent to state legislatures.
In response to these judicial orders, Rafael Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, head of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), announced that his party members would walk out of the legislative session, stating, “Our caucus will not be part of this outrage.”
Furthermore, Ricardo Monreal Ávila, the president of the Political Coordination Board (JUCOPO) in San Lázaro, indicated that Morena’s parliamentary group was considering filing political charges against the judges for overstepping their bounds. “The legislative majority believed it to be a flagrant intrusion and a constitutional violation. We are considering three actions against the judges: political prosecution to disqualify them, criminal complaints, and a grievance before the Federal Judiciary Council,” Monreal explained.
In agreement, Sergio Carlos Gutiérrez Luna, the vice president of the Chamber of Deputies, echoed these sentiments on social media, asserting that the judicial reform “will not be stopped by anyone.”
**Additional News on Judicial Reforms in Mexico**
In related news, Mexico’s legislative debate on judicial reforms continues to garner significant attention and opposition. Various legal experts and constitutional scholars have weighed in, suggesting that the proposed reforms challenge the independence of the judiciary. Critics argue that such changes could undermine checks and balances, turning the judiciary into a politically influenced body.
Recent surveys indicate that public opinion is deeply divided on this matter, with a substantial portion of the population demanding greater judicial accountability while others express concerns over potential political interference.
The National Human Rights Commission has also voiced concerns, warning that the reforms could violate fundamental judicial rights and freedoms. International bodies and human rights organizations are closely monitoring the situation, emphasizing the need for Mexico to uphold democratic principles and judicial independence.
This unfolding legal battle highlights the complex interplay between Mexico’s executive, legislative, and judicial branches, illustrating the ongoing struggle for power and control within the nation’s governance framework.