Andrés Manuel López Obrador addresses his audience on the subject of judicial reform. Photo: Andrea Murcia/Cuartooscuro.com
By Pablo Moctezuma Barragán – Aug 31, 2024
The issue of judicial reform in Mexico was debated before and during this year’s election campaign. The seriousness of the problem has been demonstrated by the rampant corruption in the judiciary.
Its complicity with foreign corporations has been displayed like never before in recent years. For a long time, it protected the interests of foreign companies against decisions of Congress. An example is the case of the Electricity Law.
Likewise, the judiciary has covered up for drug traffickers. There are many cases of criminals released despite being prosecuted for crimes.
Let us recall the case of Linda Cristina Pereyra, wife of Genaro García Luna [Mexican secretary of Citizen Security during Felipe Calderón’s presidency and convicted drug trafficker]. In February 2023, a court ordered the unblocking of her accounts. Meanwhile, she manages her husband’s finances.
Proceeding with judicial reform was a democratic decision. It is a reiterated theme in the campaign of the Let Us Continue Making History coalition [Movement for National Regeneration, Green Party, and Labor Party]. By proposing “Plan C,” the winning candidate presented it as one of her main proposals.
Dr. Claudia Sheinbaum won the presidential election with 59.8% of the vote; she obtained 35.9 million votes, and the coalition received 56% of the vote in parliamentary and regional elections. The popular mandate is clear: it gives the green light to the judicial reform.
Former President Ernesto Zedillo, of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), had acted very differently when it came to the judiciary. Starting on January 1, 1995, he suddenly closed the Supreme Court of Justice. He dismissed the 26 ministers from their functions. Within a few days, he signed the initiative to reform 20 constitutional articles approved by the legislature. He never spoke of his intention to replace the ministers in his electoral campaign. Although it was a surprising move, there was no reaction from the media, business organizations, or the governments of the United States and Canada.
Then, the Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was signed, and the ambassadors did not threaten that such a measure would harm trade relations or investment.
Zedillo argued that he did not want a court made up of ministers appointed by former presidents Miguel de la Madrid and Carlos Salinas de Gortari. That was enough for an explanation and no one refuted it.
Today, the majority of the ministers appointed by former presidents Enrique Peña Nieto and Felipe Calderón and some of those appointed by President López Obrador himself rebelled against the reform of the judiciary. In addition, they disqualified the measure, despite the fact that the measure is an expression of the people’s will.
The dominant disinformation media and the ambassadors of the United States and Canada in Mexico have unleashed a tendentious and false campaign with gross interventionism.
The defeated opposition, which prevented a constitutional change on the issue of so-called “overrepresentation,” is holding marches with the objective of condemning the distribution of plurinominal seats. In the past, they themselves applied this measure when the PRI and the PAN [National Action Party] were in power. It should also be remembered that they prevented any initiative to do the same by President López Obrador.
On August 23, the National Electoral Institute (INE) announced that Morena and its allies will have a qualified majority in the Chamber of Deputies for the legislature that begins in September…
Then, the president of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN), Norma Piña branded that day as “a black Friday, on which democracy was called into question, while the judiciary continues to be attacked.”
On August 25, several people marched against the initiative to reform the Judicial Branch of the Federation (PJF). Among them was José Ángel Gurría, former secretary of finance and foreign relations.
They called upon the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (TEPJF) to prevent the “over-representation” of MORENA and allies in Congress, thus blocking the constitutional amendment. The opposition even has support from abroad, from our “nosy partners.”
US-Mexico Row Heats up as Latin American State Pivots From America’s Grip
In an interventionist manner, the United States ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, has expressed “his concern” about the reform of the Judicial Branch proposed by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Salazar is thereby involving the US in an internal issue of Mexico.
Salazar said that the reform–in particular, the election of judges by the people’s vote–could weaken Mexican democracy and facilitate the interference of organized crime in the judicial system.
In addition, he stressed that it could put the commercial relationship between Mexico and the United States at risk. Finally, he called for an open dialogue between the two governments to address these issues jointly.
In tune with the US interventionist plan, Canada also expressed its “concerns.” Its ambassador to Mexico, Graeme Clark, pointed out that these reforms could generate instability and affect investor confidence in the Mexican judicial system.
According to him, investors are seeking stability and an effective judicial system. Therefore, any change is a cause for concern. These positions are in line with those expressed by the United States, which has also warned of possible negative impacts on trade relations.
Both countries say they fear that the election of judges by the people could introduce risks of corruption and affect judicial independence, which could have repercussions on the economic stability of the region.
In response, President López Obrador announced that relations with both embassies are “on hold” until they release a statement ratifying respect for Mexico’s sovereignty. Although he clarified that it is not a personal conflict, he emphasized the importance of foreign governments respecting the independence of our country.
How dare Mr. Ken involve himself in Mexico’s internal politics and speak about the “danger” of voting for judges when, in his country, it is common and current practice? What is more, in 29 US states, voters have the opportunity to elect judges in general elections or special elections. In other states, judges can be appointed by the governor or the legislature. However, they are subject to a “retention” at the polls, where US citizens decide whether they should remain in office.
Thus, in 43 US states, voters have the say, as President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum put it. So, we recommend that Ken go back to his country, encourage judges not to be voted for there, and stay out of Mexico’s internal affairs.
In Canada, at the federal level, superior court judges are appointed by the prime minister, with the advice of his cabinet. This includes Supreme Court justices.
At the provincial level, they are also appointed, usually by the governor in council of the province. They say that this process is applied so that they “maintain their independence.”
Canada does not even respect its own sovereignty. Its “king” is the Englishman Charles, son of “queen” Elizabeth, who was head of state for more than 70 years until the day of her death. For this reason, they do not like voting to take place.
For her part, Dr. Claudia Sheinbaum supported the decision of the president to temporarily suspend relations with the US and Canadian embassies. “It is a decision of the president of the Republic—the constitutional president—amid the offense committed by the ambassadors both from the United States and Canada,” she said.
During recent weeks, judiciary workers have carried out strikes and demonstrations against the proposals for reforms or budget cuts in different cities of the country. They also fear that the independence of the judiciary will be undermined by reducing its autonomy, budget, and financial autonomy.
On August 27, during the plenary session of the Supreme Court, the majority of the magistrates voted in favor of declaring a “non-session.” Faced with these positions, President-elect Sheinbaum indicated that “it is not a labor crisis; it is a decision made by the workers of the Judicial Branch, and the judges, to go on strike for a matter they consider political. Their labor rights are not being affected.”
What are the Supreme Court ministers defending? First, their privileges, since a minister receives a total monthly income of 792,258 pesos. In addition, they want the family networks that have taken over the judiciary to prevail.
For years, they have hired direct relatives. Their promotions have been influenced by nepotistic practices and ties of friendship. This impacts judicial independence and impartiality, in addition to making oversight difficult.
The open interference of the ambassadors of the United States and Canada is due to the fact that the current judiciary maintains strong connections with these two countries. It resolves commercial and contractual disputes and litigation in favor of foreign companies. It also protects foreign investors from control measures put in place by the Mexican state and society.
Mexico does not tolerate foreign interference, much less from the United States. In 1846-1848, the US invaded us militarily and stole more than half of our territory; it occupied our country in 1914, and kept its troops in Veracruz for a year. Later, in 1916, the US intervened again to persecute Pancho Villa.
These new interventionist actions must put us on alert. In 2023, some US senators, including Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton, proposed the use of military force against Mexico.
Moreover, with its economic power, the US intervenes to shake up the Mexican economy with financial attacks against the peso. It moves the markets with the aim of creating economic instability.
The US can try to interfere and make a lot of noise, but it is clear that the popular will wants a reform of the judicial order. It is a democratic decision that must be carried out.
The opposition is stripping itself naked before the eyes of the people. It is displaying its petty interests, and this weakens it more and more. Mexicans, united and organized, will know how to promote the changes that the country requires to achieve a full guarantee of its rights, justice, and popular sovereignty.
Translation: Orinoco Tribune
OT/KW/SL/SC
