The project of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador was approved by the vast majority of the ruling partyafter which several of its articles will have to be discussed before the process continues in the Senate.
The reform of the Judicial Branch aims to elect by popular vote judges, magistrates and ministers of the Supreme Court. The opinion with a draft decree by which various provisions of the Mexican Constitution are reformed, added to and repealed in matters of reform of the Judicial Branch was approved with 359 votes in favor of the National Regeneration Movement (Morena) and its allies, the Labor Party (PT) and the Green Ecologist Party (PVEM), and 135 against the opposition.
The marathon session has been taking place since the afternoon of Tuesday, September 3, in a sports center in Mexico City, since the legislative building was blocked by workers of the Judicial body that is on strike against the reform for two weeks now.
Read more: Five Honduran minors found in Guatemala traveling alone to the U.S.
The proposal is rejected by the opposition and generates tensions with the United States, which Threatens the relationship under the Treaty between Mexico, the United States and Canada (T-MEC) and would be a risk for Mexican democracy. According to the US government, drug trafficking could take advantage of the popular election to manipulate judges.
The reform seeks to ensure that judges and magistrates are elected from lists of candidates proposed by the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. Critics say such a mechanism could erode judicial independence.
Confrontation with the judiciary
Table of Contents
- 1 Understanding the Judicial Reform in Mexico: Implications and Controversies
López Obrador accuses judges and magistrates of promote corruption, white-collar crimes and criminal groups. However, the main target of his criticism is the Mexican Supreme Court, which has partially or completely halted his reforms in the energy and security sectors.
The Mexican president told the judges of the highest court that they had become allies of the opposition and having incomes above the legal level. During the debate on the reform, pro-government legislators echoed the president’s position.
You might be interested in: Drug trafficking on the border with Guatemala: Mexican bishops and businessmen are tired of the violence
Ricardo Monreal, coordinator of the Morena congressmen, said that The legislature cannot submit to any judge or different authority.
“Mexico is building a justice system that will be an example for the world,” he added.
Morena and its allies, who swept the general elections on June 2, add up to two thirds of the 500 seats required in the Chamber of Deputies to approve constitutional reforms without negotiating with the opposition.
The initiative, presented in February 2024, will also have to be voted on in the Senate, where the ruling party Only one vote is missing to achieve the so-called qualified majority..
Read also: AMLO decides to pause relations with US and Canadian embassies over judicial reform
US concern
The US ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, reiterated his criticism of the reform by accusing that puts the bilateral relationship at risk.
“If it is not done properly, it can cause a lot of damage to the relationship. There is a lot of concern,” the diplomat told reporters.
Canada has also warned about risks to legal security of investments.
The British consultancy Capital Economics He explains that the concerns are shared and investors are focused on the Mexican currency, bonds and stocks. They fear that the reform could lead to a politicization of the Judiciary.
Demos means “people”. This noun, together with krátos, which can be translated as “power”, makes up the name of democracy: the power of the people.
Abraham Lincoln defined it like this: “Democracy is government of the people, by the people, for the people.”
To the president…
— Dra. Claudia Sheinbaum (@Claudiashein) September 4, 2024
Read more: AMLO responds to US presidential promises: “Mexico is free and we don’t want walls”
López Obrador has described these expressions as “interventionist” while the president-elect, Claudia Sheinbaum, who will take office on October 1, rejected criticism of the initiative.
“The reform of the judicial power It does not affect our trade relations or national private investments.nor foreigners. On the contrary, there will be more and better rule of law and more democracy for all,” Sheinbaum said on the social network X (before Twitter).
window.addEventListener(‘DOMContentLoaded’, function() {
/*(function($) {*/
(function (d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s);
js.id = id;
js.src = document.location.protocol + “//connect.facebook.net/es_LA/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
/*})(jQuery);*/
});
#Judicial #reform #Mexico #approved #Chamber #Deputies
Understanding the Judicial Reform in Mexico: Implications and Controversies
In a significant political development, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s (AMLO) proposal for judicial reform has gained overwhelming support from the ruling National Regeneration Movement (Morena) and its allies. This reform, which aims to elect judges, magistrates, and Supreme Court justices by popular vote, has stirred considerable debate and opposition, raising concerns about its impact on Mexico’s judicial independence and international relations. This article delves into the details, implications, and controversies surrounding this reform.
Overview of the Judicial Reform Proposal
The judicial reform, approved with 359 votes in favor and 135 against in the Chamber of Deputies, intends to modify multiple provisions of the Mexican Constitution. The primary objective is to democratize the selection of the judiciary by allowing judges and magistrates to be chosen from a list of candidates proposed by the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. Proponents argue this will enhance accountability and public trust in the judiciary; however, critics warn it could lead to the politicization of the judicial system and undermine its independence.
Key Points of the Reform
- Judges and Magistrates Elected by Popular Vote: A radical departure from the traditional appointment process, which is seen as more insulated from political pressures.
- List of Candidates: Candidates for judicial positions would be proposed by various government branches, potentially allowing for executive influence over the judiciary.
- Legislative Process: The reform is set to undergo further discussion and voting in the Senate, where the ruling party holds a narrow margin for securing a qualified majority.
Legislative Background and Political Dynamics
The reform proposal emerged amidst a backdrop of dissatisfaction with the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, which AMLO has accused of corruption and inefficiency. A key aspect of the debate has been the ongoing workers’ strike by judicial staff opposing the reform, reflecting significant dissent within the legal community.
Opposition Concerns
The opposition has raised several alarms regarding the reform:
- Erosion of Judicial Independence: Critics argue that enabling political branches to propose candidates undermines the impartiality of the judiciary and risks increasing corruption.
- Autonomy Threat: Detractors emphasize that the judiciary’s core function is to act as a check on power, a role that could be jeopardized by the proposed reforms.
The U.S. Perspective and International Relations
The judicial reform has drawn international scrutiny, particularly from the United States, which has expressed concerns over potential ramifications for bilateral relations under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (T-MEC). U.S. officials warn that the election of judges could be exploited by organized crime, thereby impacting drug trafficking control efforts.
U.S. Diplomatic Concerns
- Impact on Bilateral Relations: U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ken Salazar has emphasized that improper implementation of the reform could damage relations between the two nations.
- Investor Confidence: There are rising worries about the reform’s implications for foreign investment in Mexico, with analysts suggesting it could lead to a more politicized judiciary.
The Domestic Political Landscape
López Obrador’s administration has positioned the judicial reform as a means of fighting corruption and fostering a more responsive government. AMLO’s allies echo his sentiments, asserting that the legislature should not be submissive to judicial decisions. The ruling coalition’s sizable majority enables it to push through reforms without significant opposition.
Claudia Sheinbaum’s Stance
Claudia Sheinbaum, who is set to succeed AMLO, has aligned herself with the president’s views. She argues that the judicial reform will not adversely affect trade relations or investment but will instead promote the rule of law and democratic governance.
Conclusion: The Future of Mexico’s Judiciary
Mexico stands at a crossroads regarding its judicial landscape. The proposed reforms may reshape the relationship between the branches of government and redefine the role of the judiciary in democracy. As discussions progress in the Senate, stakeholders from various sectors—political, legal, and economic—will keep a watchful eye on the developments, each weighing the implications for judicial independence, accountability, and international relations.
Key Takeaways
- The push for judicial reform represents a fundamental shift in how judges are selected in Mexico, underpinning significant political and legal challenges.
- International reactions highlight the delicate balance Mexico must maintain in its governance and foreign relations.
- The ongoing discourse surrounding this reform is a pivotal moment for Mexican democracy, potentially setting precedents that could resonate well beyond its borders.
With the political climate in constant flux, the final outcomes of the judicial reform remain to be seen as all eyes turn toward the Senate for the next steps.
