### Judges, Magistrates, and Workers of the Federal Judiciary Threaten Work Stoppage Over Judicial Reform
Hundreds of members of the National Association of Circuit Magistrates and District Judges (JUFED) protested on August 13, 2024, in front of the San Lázaro Palace of Justice. They voiced their strong opposition to the proposed reform of the Federal Judiciary (PJF) sent by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to the Congress of the Union on February 5 of the same year.
Juana Fuentes Velázquez, President of JUFED, explained that members of the Judicial Council (CJF) coalesced to defend judicial independence, anticipating possible approval of the reform by the Morena party and its allies, the Green Ecologist Party of Mexico (PVEM), and the Labor Party (PT), which are expected to hold a significant majority in the new Legislature starting September 1, 2024.
“In response, [the workers of the Federal Judiciary] may agree on a temporary work stoppage, exercising our highest-ranking right,” Fuentes Velázquez declared. She emphasized that this measure would only be used as a last resort to ensure that the reform is comprehensive and achieves consensus among legislative majorities and other social actors.
Fuentes Velázquez highlighted concerns that the reform, which proposes electing judges, magistrates, and ministers by popular vote, could enable power groups, including illegal ones, to exert undue influence over the judiciary. She underscored the risks this poses to judicial independence, constitutional stability, and the protection of human rights, especially for the most vulnerable.
“The next government [headed by Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo] has a historic opportunity to achieve a transformative reform if it addresses access to justice and provides legal security for investors,” she said. Fuentes Velázquez called for the professionalization of police and prosecutors, strengthening public defenders, and revitalizing the penitentiary system.
The JUFED president urged attention to the voices expressing genuine concerns to embark on a well-considered reform process. She warned that September 2024 could be tragic if the new Congress and the incoming president push forward the reform without heeding warnings and considering better alternatives.
She affirmed the duty to defend judicial independence and called on the incoming Legislature and government to halt the current flawed reform process. Instead, she advocated for a comprehensive and thoughtful reform discussion.
Fuentes Velázquez stressed that electing Federal Judiciary members could lead to politicization, affecting the poor and those who suffer from the most violence and discrimination. She warned of a potential constitutional crisis threatening governance.
“September 2024 should not be remembered for disregarding the qualified voices calling for a different reform approach. We hope the next President of Mexico will drive justice reform with vision, dialogue, and a clear timeline for its diagnosis, discussion, design, drafting, and implementation,” she concluded.
On August 8, 2024, Ernestina Godoy Ramos, the prospective head of the Federal Executive’s Legal Counsel (CJEF) and a virtual senator-elect from Morena, indicated that there would be changes to the presidential proposal for judicial reform. She noted substantial concerns raised during the National Dialogues on Constitutional Reform of the Judiciary and promised a non-echo-chamber dialogue.
Juan Ramiro Robledo Ruiz, Chair of the Constitutional Points Commission in the House of Representatives and a Morena legislative group member, announced that the draft reform proposal would be ready by August 15, 2024, to start discussions and eventual approval. He emphasized three key aspects: the method of electing judges, maintaining the independence of the Judiciary from other government branches, and unrestrictively respecting judicial workers’ rights.
Stay tuned to TJGringo.com for updates on this critical issue.
### Secondary Article: Broader Reactions to the Judicial Reform Proposal
The judicial reform proposal has sparked reactions from various sectors beyond the National Association of Magistrates and Judges. Across Mexico, legal professionals, human rights organizations, and political analysts have expressed their concerns.
Human rights advocates argue that electing judges by popular vote could compromise judicial impartiality. “The risk of judges being influenced by political pressures jeopardizes the integrity of legal decisions,” says Mariela Hernández, a prominent human rights lawyer.
Legal experts emphasize the importance of an independent judiciary for a functioning democracy. Alicia Benítez, a constitutional law professor, remarks, “Judicial independence is paramount. Any reform must ensure that judges can operate free from political influence.”
Even international observers have weighed in, with organizations such as Amnesty International cautioning against reforms that could undermine judicial autonomy. “A truly independent judiciary is essential for upholding human rights and the rule of law,” states their recent report.
Meanwhile, public sentiment is mixed. Some citizens support the idea of having a direct say in electing judges, viewing it as a democratic enhancement, while others fear it could lead to politicization and corruption within the judiciary.
The next steps will be crucial as the new Congress debates the reform. The outcome could significantly impact the future of Mexico’s judicial system and its democratic institutions. Stay informed with TJGringo.com for the latest developments and expert analyses on this pivotal issue.