### Constitutional Reform Ends Judicial Independence
In February 2024, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador presented a constitutional reform initiative to the Legislative Branch, which would severely impact the independence of the Judicial Power in Mexico. On September 3, 2024, the initiative was approved with modifications by the Chamber of Deputies, with an overwhelming majority from the Morena party. More recently, the Senate passed the reform in a rapid manner, seemingly as a parting gift to the President who will leave office on September 30, 2024.
The central idea of the reform is to have all judges in the country—both at the federal and local levels—elected by a so-called “popular and secret” vote. The President’s general argument is that current judges are corrupt, and thus, all should be dismissed and replaced by a new judiciary supposedly elected by the people. Proponents cite Article 39 of the Constitution, which states that “National sovereignty resides essentially and originally in the people. All public power emanates from the people and is instituted for their benefit.”
The reform purports that electing judges through popular vote will grant them legitimacy and open up the judicial field to any citizen, breaking the “formal judicial circle.” The first round of judicial elections is scheduled for next year (2025), followed by another in 2027. In the first period, half of the current judges will be replaced, with the remaining half to follow in the second period.
Federally, this reform will affect the Ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice, reducing their number from eleven to nine. It will also impact the Magistrates of the Superior Chamber and Regional Chambers of the Electoral Tribunal, Circuit Judges, and District Judges.
The magical notion of electing judges through popular vote is claimed to eradicate corruption in the Mexican Judicial Power—a notion deemed spectacular and democratic by Morena supporters. However, grave concerns arise about judicial independence. The independence of the judiciary relies on judges making decisions freely and exercising their jurisdictional functions without pressures from the Judicial, Legislative, or Executive branches. There could even be external pressures from media and political parties, as well as internal pressures within the Judicial Power itself.
The critical question remains: would this new legal and institutional framework support or undermine the independence of Mexico’s judiciary? It seems clear that the proposal reduces judicial independence due to the inevitably external pressures tied to popular elections. Like politicians, judges’ election could depend heavily on their backers, compromising their actions and decisions.
### Current Developments: Concerns Over Judicial Reform Deepen
Additional reporting from various sources has continued to highlight the concerns regarding this constitutional reform. Critics argue that electing judges could lead to the politicization of the judiciary, reducing its impartiality. Legal experts warn that this could undermine the rule of law and erode public trust in the judicial system. There are fears that judges might cater to popular opinion or political pressures instead of adhering strictly to legal principles.
Recent polls indicate that public opinion is divided on this issue. While some believe it will democratize the judiciary, others fear it might lead to a degradation of judicial quality and fairness. The international community is watching closely, with some human rights organizations expressing worry about potential implications for judicial independence in Mexico.
As the first round of judicial elections approaches, all eyes will be on how this unprecedented move unfolds and what it will mean for the future of Mexico’s judicial system.