Election of judges in Mexico: this is how the independence of the Judiciary could be extinguished

Nearly 100 million Mexicans are called to the polls on June 1 to elect, for the first time in its history, nearly 900 federal judicial posts in elections marked by low confidence in state institutions, the potential interference of organized crime, and the legacy of former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) for his very controversial judicial reform passed last year.

Despite concerns raised by pro-democracy organizations and allied countries such as the U.S. and Canada, Mexico moved forward with its judicial reform in 2024, proposing a total reset of the judiciary through the popular election of all persons who are judges or magistrates of the Mexican judiciary.

To size up the situation, in one fell swoop, the Mexican executive branch and Congress, controlled by AMLO's ruling 'Morena' party and current Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, approved that almost 2,000 positions be submitted to popular vote in one sitting, opening the door to a total restructuring in record time of the only power with some independence in the Mexican Republic.

This type of voting system for electing judges, magistrates, and other federal judicial positions proposed in Mexico has only one similar example in Bolivia, a country known for its institutional shortcomings and few democratic guarantees.

Now, in June, will be the first judicial election day in Mexico's history, with exactly 881 federal judicial positions at stake. This represents approximately half of the positions in the Federal Judiciary (PJF). The other half will be voted on in 2027.

The positions that will be voted on June 1 will be 9 ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, 2 judgeships of the Superior Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal (TEPJF), 14 judgeships of the Regional Chambers of the TEPJF, 5 judgeships of the Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal, 464 circuit judgeships, and 386 district judges.

Why are elections so controversial?

The elections not only generate concern because of all the positions that will be elected in a single day, but also because the voting system is chaotic and the process is highly exposed to external agents that could take advantage of the vulnerabilities to break the independence of the candidates. For example, several political analysts, journalists, and important voices in Mexico have denounced that organized crime could use this electoral system of judges to easily infiltrate trusted candidates into key positions or simply threaten or subdue those who aspire to the hundreds of positions.

A clear example of this is Silvia Delgado, a 51-year-old lawyer known for representing between 2016 and 2017 the co-founder of the Sinaloa Cartel, Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, who is competing for the position of judge in criminal matters in the judicial district 5 Bravos, based in Ciudad Juárez.

Miguel Alfonso Meza, an anti-corruption activist, told The Washington Post that cases like Delgado's demonstrate how the nomination process fails to detect conflicts of interest that could affect how judges and magistrates issue rulings.

"You can't one day be defending the Sinaloa cartel and the next day be in a job where you're judging a lot of people who belong to the Sinaloa cartel," said Alfonso Meza.

Another major concern, exposed by the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), is that the ballots designed are more cumbersome than those of a regular election. At the time of voting, each voter will have to use six separate federal ballots, plus those that apply if there are local elections in his or her state. Each ballot includes separate lists of men and women, with names, numbers, the power that nominates them, and, if applicable, the subject matter. To vote, the corresponding numbers must be written in specific boxes, following a color code according to the subject. In English: a very complex and difficult ballot to fill in.

This kind of distrust in the process has generated, according to El País, the historic figure of 316,000 requests to be election observers during June 1. This number exceeds by ten the applications for the 2024 presidential elections, when only 34,000 sent their request to be observers.

Another point that generates much distrust and suspicion in the process is the ability of the official party, Morena, to have greater representation in the candidates.

According to WOLA, the judicial reform approved last year proposes a popular vote for the election of federal judges and magistrates instead of the current system based on exams and institutional appointments. This model is intended to be applied in the 32 states of the country, something unprecedented in the region.

In this new scheme, the three branches of government—executive, legislative, and judicial—would nominate candidates through evaluation committees formed by "experts." However, although it may appear to be an independent mechanism, in practice, if a single party dominates two of those branches (as MORENA does today), it will have almost total control over who does and does not enter the judicial branch.

The concern is that this clearly opens the door to a political capture of the judicial system: judges aligned with the party in power, with no real independence.

In addition, the reform creates a Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal, also elected by popular vote, with the power to evaluate and sanction judges during their first year. If this tribunal remains in the hands of the ruling party, it becomes one more mechanism of political pressure on the rest of the judiciary, according to WOLA.

Another point of concern is that, at the beginning of the year, the president of the National Electoral Institute (INE), Guadalupe Taddei, stated that the expected turnout for Election Day was between 8% and 18%, a very low figure considering the importance of the process and all that is at stake.

The situation in Mexico, a country increasingly affected by organized crime, drug trafficking, hired killings, and corruption, has already caused alarm in the world's major media.

For example, The Economist has already called the election of judges by popular vote a terrible idea for the country.

"Mexico is about to become the only country to elect every one of its judges by popular vote. This is a terrible idea for justice, democracy, and the economy," the magazine said.