MEXICO CITY (EFE).— Mexican judges warned in a letter to the Legislative Branch that the judicial reform violates the Treaty between Mexico, the United States and Canada (T-MEC), since it infringes various commitments acquired by the country in said agreement.
In a letter to the senators and deputies, who will vote on the initiative today, the National Association of Circuit Magistrates and District Judges of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (Jufed) expressed its rejection of the reform, which among other things proposes the election of judges by popular vote starting in 2025.
This is because, they argued, “it violates and fails to comply with Annex 23 of the USMCA, insofar as it relates to the commitment to establish and maintain independent courts for the resolution of labor disputes.”
In the text, in which they ask to reconsider the reform, they assured that it “transgresses” Mexico’s obligations agreed upon in chapters 14 and 27 of the T-MEC related to investments and anti-corruption policies.
“Mexico’s compliance with the international commitments assumed by this treaty depends not only on guaranteeing the independence of specialized labor courts, but also on ensuring the independence of all jurisdictional bodies that hear lawsuits involving the interests of foreign investors,” they argued.
The group of judges and magistrates recalled that in a trilateral pre-agreement signed in August 2018, Mexico committed to adapting the corresponding legislation to guarantee and maintain independent and impartial labor courts.
This agreement, they recalled, was signed by Andrés Manuel López Obrador on November 30 of that year, when he was president-elect.
They considered it “undeniable” that the election of judges by popular vote would not contribute to the rule of law or strengthen the judiciary, and instead would “threaten the historic” trade relationship between Mexico, the United States and Canada.
“A weak rule of law can increase the costs and uncertainty in maintaining and enforcing international commitments, and it also endangers national security, as this reform is very likely to allow organized crime to break into the judiciary,” they stressed.
They therefore called for finding reform alternatives “that will allow the country to continue its democratic and economic progress.”
Judicial warning Think about the treaty
Mexican judges say reform will greatly delay professionalization of justice.
Be warned…
The considerable delay in the professionalization of the administration of specialized justice, such as the “new labor justice system” that began in 2019, would occur because, based on the T-MEC, the federal Judiciary has generated technical-legal criteria in specialized matters.
Promotes training
“It has also promoted the ongoing training of judges through the judicial career, which has allowed for the professional administration of justice for the benefit of those seeking justice,” they said.
Table of Contents
#USMCA #risk #due #judicial #reform
2024-09-13 05:38:13
How will Mexico’s judicial reform impact the country’s international commitments, particularly under the T-MEC agreement?
Mexico’s Controversial Judicial Reform: A Threat to the Rule of Law and International Commitments?
In a move that has sparked widespread controversy, Mexico’s government has introduced a judicial reform that would allow judges to be elected by popular vote starting in 2025. The reform, which has been approved by the Senate, has been criticized by many, including the National Association of Circuit Magistrates and District Judges of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (Jufed), who argue that it violates Mexico’s international commitments, including the Treaty between Mexico, the United States, and Canada (T-MEC) [[1]].
The Jufed has expressed its rejection of the reform, stating that it “transgresses” Mexico’s obligations agreed upon in chapters 14 and 27 of the T-MEC related to investments and anti-corruption policies. They argue that the election of judges by popular vote would not contribute to the rule of law or strengthen the judiciary, but instead would “threaten the historic” trade relationship between Mexico, the United States, and Canada [[1]].
The reform has also raised concerns about the independence of the judiciary, with many arguing that it would allow for political interference in the appointment of judges. This has led to warnings of a potential erosion of checks and balances, which could undermine Mexico’s economic and political stability [[2]].
Furthermore, the reform has been criticized for its potential impact on Mexico’s sovereign rating. Moody’s, a credit rating agency, has warned that the reform could lead to a downgrade in Mexico’s credit rating, citing concerns about the potential erosion of judicial independence and the impact on investor confidence [[2]].
The controversy surrounding the reform has also led to concerns about the impact on Mexico’s international relationships. The Jufed has argued that the reform would violate Mexico’s commitments under the T-MEC, including the establishment of independent labor courts. This has led to warnings about the potential damage to Mexico’s trade relationships with the United States and Canada [[1]].
Despite the controversy, the Mexican government has pushed forward with the reform, which has been hailed by some as a necessary step towards ending corruption and promoting accountability in the judiciary. However, others have warned that the reform could have far-reaching and potentially damaging consequences for Mexico’s rule of law, economic stability, and international relationships [[3]].
As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the judicial reform is a highly controversial and complex issue that requires careful consideration and careful analysis of its potential consequences. It is essential that Mexico’s government and lawmakers take into account the concerns of the judiciary, civil society, and international organizations, and work towards finding a solution that balances the need for accountability with the need to protect the independence of the judiciary.
References:
How might Mexico’s proposed judicial reform affect the enforcement of the USMCA and foreign investment in the country?
Mexico’s Judicial Reform: A Threat to the T-MEC and National Security?
The Mexican government’s proposed judicial reform has sparked controversy and concern among judges, lawmakers, and international observers. The reform, which includes the election of judges by popular vote starting in 2025, has been criticized for violating Mexico’s commitments under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and potentially undermining the country’s national security.
Judicial Warning: Think About the Treaty
In a letter to the Legislative Branch, the National Association of Circuit Magistrates and District Judges of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (Jufed) expressed its rejection of the reform, citing its incompatibility with the USMCA. The judges argued that the election of judges by popular vote would violate Annex 23 of the USMCA, which commits Mexico to establishing and maintaining independent courts for the resolution of labor disputes [[1]]. They also warned that the reform would “transgress” Mexico’s obligations under chapters 14 and 27 of the USMCA, related to investments and anti-corruption policies.
A Threat to National Security?
The judges and magistrates warned that the election of judges by popular vote would not contribute to the rule of law or strengthen the judiciary, but instead would “threaten the historic” trade relationship between Mexico, the United States, and Canada [[2]]. They stressed that a weak rule of law could increase the costs and uncertainty in maintaining and enforcing international commitments, and would also endanger national security by allowing organized crime to infiltrate the judiciary.
Consequences for Trade and Economy
The EU has also expressed concerns about the reform, with a legislator noting that Mexico has “much to do” to overcome the challenges posed by the reform, particularly in light of the upcoming review of the USMCA in 2026 [[3]]. The Atlantic Council has warned that Mexico’s proposed judicial reforms could put the USMCA on shaky ground, potentially disrupting trade and investment between the three countries.
Alternative Reforms Needed
The judges and magistrates called for finding alternative reform solutions that would allow Mexico to continue its democratic and economic progress. They emphasized the need to ensure the independence of all jurisdictional bodies that hear lawsuits involving the interests of foreign investors, as well as to maintain the professionalism of the judiciary.
Conclusion
Mexico’s proposed judicial reform has sparked a heated debate about the country’s commitments under the USMCA and its impact on national security. As the Senate prepares to vote on the reform, it is essential to consider the concerns raised by judges, lawmakers, and international observers. The country must find a balance between democratizing the judiciary and maintaining its international commitments, ensuring that any reforms prioritize the rule of law, independence, and national security.
References:
