He Senate of the Republic generally approved, with the Morena‘s vote and his allies, the reforms to secondary laws that establish the rules for the election of 896 judges, magistrates and ministers on June 1, 2025, by eliminating an addition proposed by the right of veto by the three powers against candidates for judges.
The reform to the General Law of Electoral Procedures and Institutions and the Law of Means of Challenge was approved with 81 votes in favor and 40 against. It establishes the rules for the election of members of the Judiciary by popular vote.
The Morena bench backed down today on the modification it had included in the president’s reform Claudia Sheinbaumwhere the right of veto was granted.
On the platform, the vice coordinator of Morena, Ignacio Mierannounced he withdrew this reservation: “There will in no way be any veto for any of the candidates. “We are in favor of there being an elective democratic process for judges, ministers and magistrates,” he argued.
Meaning of the right of veto
On Tuesday night, the Senate’s Interior and Legislative Studies commissions, dominated by Morena, approved a change that subjected the Evaluation Committees and gave Congress, the federal Executive and the Judiciary the power to reject the lists prepared by the technical evaluators.
It is called veto to the “power that heads of state have to oppose a law or decree that Congress sends to them for promulgation,” according to the glossary of the Legislative Information System of the Ministry of the Interior.
Read. What is the veto?
That veto power It was already included in the proposal to reform the General Law of Electoral Institutions and Procedures, which the president sent to the Senate on Monday.
Article 500 of said law states that among all the lawyers who apply, the committees must make up lists of “the best evaluated people”: lists of 10 for each position of minister of the Supreme Court of Justice; 10 for each position of magistrate of the Superior Chamber and the regional chambers of the Electoral Tribunal; 10 for each position of the new Judicial Disciplinary Court; six for each position of circuit magistrate and six for each position of district judge.
Veto power, in the original proposal
Sheinbaum’s original proposal already included that the Powers of the Union had to “determine their agreement on the lists of finalists.” However, the Morena senators made an addition: “The Powers of the Union will first determine their total or partial compliance with the lists referred to in the previous paragraph; In the event that the entire list is rejected, the Committees must present a new list.”
The new paragraph implied that the Executive – that is, Claudia Sheinbaum -, the Chambers of Congress – both dominated by Morena -, and the Judiciary may reject the nominations of the Evaluation Committees. If the rejection is total, the committees should draw up a new list. In the event that it is partial, only some names would be removed from the lists.
At no point was it established whether the rejection should be justified, especially when the veto will fall on theoretically suitable and qualified profiles.
Presidential veto: what did Claudia Sheinbaum say?
For her part, today the president Claudia Sheinbaum He reported that his government did not agree with the initiative that sought the right to veto, so he asked that it be removed.
In response to a specific question in her morning conference, the head of the federal Executive indicated that she does not know who the initiative came from, but she pointed out that what is established in the Constitution.
“It was removed, it was removed. We did not agree. It had been an initiative, I don’t know whose initiative it was, but that should not happen, what is established in the Constitution must be maintained,” he said.
Despite this, Adán Augusto López Hernández, coordinator of the Morena bench, clarified in an interview that withdrawing the veto was a consensus decision of the group and He denied that they had received a “line” from the National Palace.
“No, there is no line here. We are respectful, it is part of the legislative process, Ignacio Mier already explained it, we reflect on it, we debate it, we discuss it within the group, and “We agreed to present reserves.”
Related
#presidential #veto #power #Morena
