Latest news with #AndrésManuelLópezObrador
Boston Globe
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
How a vote on nearly 2,700 judges could further help one party dominate Mexico
Morena leaders said they decided on the election to fix a justice system rife with corrupt judges who served the elite, rather than everyone, and who kept frustrating the party's plans. In the process, they could eliminate the final major check on Morena's power. Many legal and political analysts in Mexico expect candidates aligned with Morena to dominate the election, filling judgeships from local courthouses to the Supreme Court and giving the party effective control over the third branch of government. Advertisement As a result, Mexicans face the paradox that giving more power to the public may undercut their democracy. Predictions for Morena's success Sunday are driven by the unusual nature of the vote. Just roughly 20 percent of voters are expected to cast ballots, electoral authorities say, in part because voters hardly know the candidates. Polling shows Morena is overwhelmingly popular and the opposition is frail. The government controlled the selection process for federal candidates, who are elected by voters nationally, and 19 of 32 states will also elect local candidates. Advertisement Candidates are largely barred from traditional campaigning, a policy to try to level the playing field among candidates with different campaign funds. And political operatives have been accused of handing out cheat sheets, most of which recommend candidates with known ties to Morena. 'This is not an election -- this is an appointment by the Morena government that's going to be validated by a vote,' Carlos Heredia, a left-leaning political analyst, said this month. He previously advised Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the former Mexican president who founded Morena and signed the overhaul in his final days in office last year. Andrés García Repper, a former Morena lawyer who helped select candidates and is now one himself, disputed that the new judges would be beholden to the government. But he said vigilance will be important. 'In no way is this a carte blanche,' he said this month. 'We must demand a lot and point out each and every irregularity.' President Claudia Sheinbaum has called the election the most democratic way to fix widespread problems in the courts like corruption and nepotism, saying that the vote takes the power to pick judges from government bureaucrats and gives it to the public. 'Mexico will be a more democratic country on June 1,' she told reporters last week. She has pointed out that she would have been able to appoint four Supreme Court justices during her six-year term. 'We are giving up that right,' she told supporters this month, 'because we want the people to choose, because that's what democracy is.' Mexicans have long agreed that the justice system is broken. A broad history of impunity for the wealthy and powerful has led the public to largely give up on seeking justice; 92 percent of crimes go unreported in Mexico, a rate that has gone unchanged for a decade, according to an annual study. Advertisement As a result, a poll of 1,000 Mexicans this month showed that 72 percent believed the election was 'necessary.' Yet, 77 percent couldn't name a single candidate. In that atmosphere of uncertainty, Morena supporters have pushed the party's preferred candidates. Over the past several weeks, there have been numerous news reports of Morena operatives distributing 'acordeones,' or cheat sheets that fold out like accordions with the candidates Morena wants elected. They are designed to be carried to the polls to help voters pick from a long, confusing ballot. One cheat sheet viewed by The New York Times simply lists the numbers assigned to candidates on the ballot, leaving out their names. Sheinbaum has publicly criticized the cheat sheets, saying they are not an official party strategy. 'People have to decide,' she said this past week. 'I am not going to guide them to vote for one person or another.' Sheinbaum has had to carry out the election since López Obrador, her political mentor, left office. From the start of his presidency in 2018, López Obrador frequently called judges corrupt, but for years, he largely did not dispute their decisions. Then, in 2023, the Supreme Court blocked some of his plans, including his efforts to weaken the nation's electoral watchdog and to put the National Guard under military control. Lower-court judges also issued orders suspending some of his flagship projects because of environmental concerns. Advertisement He responded by vowing to replace the judges by popular vote. His Morena party and allies won large majorities in Congress last year. And, in his final major act as president, López Obrador signed into law a slate of constitutional amendments that overhauled Mexico's judicial system. Most judgeships became elected positions, the number of Supreme Court justices fell to nine from 11, and a new, so-called disciplinary court was created. That court will have broad powers to investigate and impeach judges, and its decisions will not be subject to appeal. Jurists worry that the vote Sunday will pack the disciplinary court with Morena loyalists who hold the rest of the judiciary to the party line. Morena party officials have argued that while electing judges is not perfect, it is the best possible avenue to overhaul a judiciary that was not administering fair justice. Many others in Mexico question whether there could have been a better process. Lila Abed, a former Mexican government official who runs the Mexico Program at the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington, said the election would most likely usher in less qualified and potentially more compromised judges than the current system. 'Does the judiciary need reform? Yes,' she said. 'Is this the reform it needs? No.' While the election could prevent many future clashes with the courts, political analysts still see it as a headache for Sheinbaum as she tries to navigate a precarious relationship with President Trump. Some candidates have been accused of links to cartels, raising fears that the election could extend the cartels' influence over parts of the judiciary. The election has also injected uncertainty into the economy. Advertisement Foreign companies, worried about who could soon be deciding their cases, have been rushing to settle litigation before new judges take office, said Gerardo Esquivel, an economist and former board member of Mexico's central bank who advises companies. 'Of the firms I speak to that are moving to Mexico, their main concern is the judicial reform,' he said. This article originally appeared in
Yahoo
a day ago
- General
- Yahoo
Mexico's judicial reform raises concerns over judicial independence
May 30 (UPI) -- Nearly 100 million Mexicans are set to take part in an unprecedented election on June 1 that will reshape the country's judiciary. Voters will elect 881 judicial officials, including Supreme Court justices, electoral magistrates, district judges and circuit court magistrates, under a sweeping reform originally pushed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and backed by current President Claudia Sheinbaum. Initially presented in 2014 as a step toward democratizing justice and combating corruption, the reform has drawn mounting criticism from legal experts, academics and civil society organizations. Many warn it could erode judicial independence, increase political interference, and weaken the rule of law. An analysis by Stanford Law School's Rule of Law Impact Lab and the Mexican Bar Association warns that electing judges by popular vote compromises their independence and impartiality by aligning judicial decisions with public opinion rather than strictly with the law. It also highlights the risk that judicial rulings will be influenced by judicial election campaign donors. Academics, legal experts and civil society organizations have raised concerns about the complexity of the electoral process, highlighting several key issues. First, the proposed reform has been criticized for a lack of clear criteria to assess candidates' qualifications. Candidates are only required to hold a law degree, have at least five years of professional experience, no criminal record, and a good reputation. Candidates are also asked to submit a legal essay and letters of recommendation. Studies show that the selected candidates have, on average, 20 fewer years of experience than the judges they are replacing under the reform. Many of the candidates also come from outside the judiciary and lack the training and background needed to carry out judicial duties effectively. Second, voters in Mexico have received limited information despite the complexity of the process, which includes six ballots and more than 7,000 candidates competing for 2,600 local and federal judicial seats. The Judicial Electoral Observatory, or OEJ, has warned that voters are not receiving adequate information, compromising electoral fairness. One factor is that the National Electoral Institute, or INE, received 52% less funding than it requested, limiting its ability to provide outreach and education. The OEJ also criticized the ballot design and inconsistent selection standards across the evaluation committees, saying these issues undermine the legitimacy of the process and make it difficult for voters to make informed choices. Third, the judicial reform has raised serious concerns about the influence of political actors and power groups in the process. The complexity of the changes and the short, eight-month timeline to organize the election may have created openings for political parties to assert control in parts of the country. Organizations including México Evalúa, the Center for Research and Teaching in Economics, or CIDE, and the National Autonomous University of Mexico, or UNAM, have warned that the system could allow political, economic or criminal interests to infiltrate the judiciary, especially in regions where organized crime is strong. Many of the candidates have ties to the ruling party, said Luis F. Fernández, executive director of Practica: Laboratorio para la Democracia, in an interview with CNN en Español. "We've identified others linked to the country's 10 wealthiest businessmen, and more than 15 candidates connected to drug trafficking," he said. The popular election of judges is rare internationally and, where it exists, is usually limited to local or mid-level courts. In most democratic countries, judges are appointed by technical committees, the judiciary or the executive branch with legislative approval. The goal is to preserve judicial independence and prevent politicization. Mexico's proposed model -- a direct, large-scale, nationwide election of judges at all levels, including the Supreme Court -- is unprecedented.
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Mexico's judicial reform raises concerns over judicial independence
May 30 (UPI) -- Nearly 100 million Mexicans are set to take part in an unprecedented election on June 1 that will reshape the country's judiciary. Voters will elect 881 judicial officials, including Supreme Court justices, electoral magistrates, district judges and circuit court magistrates, under a sweeping reform originally pushed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and backed by current President Claudia Sheinbaum. Initially presented in 2014 as a step toward democratizing justice and combating corruption, the reform has drawn mounting criticism from legal experts, academics and civil society organizations. Many warn it could erode judicial independence, increase political interference, and weaken the rule of law. An analysis by Stanford Law School's Rule of Law Impact Lab and the Mexican Bar Association warns that electing judges by popular vote compromises their independence and impartiality by aligning judicial decisions with public opinion rather than strictly with the law. It also highlights the risk that judicial rulings will be influenced by judicial election campaign donors. Academics, legal experts and civil society organizations have raised concerns about the complexity of the electoral process, highlighting several key issues. First, the proposed reform has been criticized for a lack of clear criteria to assess candidates' qualifications. Candidates are only required to hold a law degree, have at least five years of professional experience, no criminal record, and a good reputation. Candidates are also asked to submit a legal essay and letters of recommendation. Studies show that the selected candidates have, on average, 20 fewer years of experience than the judges they are replacing under the reform. Many of the candidates also come from outside the judiciary and lack the training and background needed to carry out judicial duties effectively. Second, voters in Mexico have received limited information despite the complexity of the process, which includes six ballots and more than 7,000 candidates competing for 2,600 local and federal judicial seats. The Judicial Electoral Observatory, or OEJ, has warned that voters are not receiving adequate information, compromising electoral fairness. One factor is that the National Electoral Institute, or INE, received 52% less funding than it requested, limiting its ability to provide outreach and education. The OEJ also criticized the ballot design and inconsistent selection standards across the evaluation committees, saying these issues undermine the legitimacy of the process and make it difficult for voters to make informed choices. Third, the judicial reform has raised serious concerns about the influence of political actors and power groups in the process. The complexity of the changes and the short, eight-month timeline to organize the election may have created openings for political parties to assert control in parts of the country. Organizations including México Evalúa, the Center for Research and Teaching in Economics, or CIDE, and the National Autonomous University of Mexico, or UNAM, have warned that the system could allow political, economic or criminal interests to infiltrate the judiciary, especially in regions where organized crime is strong. Many of the candidates have ties to the ruling party, said Luis F. Fernández, executive director of Practica: Laboratorio para la Democracia, in an interview with CNN en Español. 'We've identified others linked to the country's 10 wealthiest businessmen, and more than 15 candidates connected to drug trafficking,' he said. The popular election of judges is rare internationally and, where it exists, is usually limited to local or mid-level courts. In most democratic countries, judges are appointed by technical committees, the judiciary or the executive branch with legislative approval. The goal is to preserve judicial independence and prevent politicization. Mexico's proposed model -- a direct, large-scale, nationwide election of judges at all levels, including the Supreme Court -- is unprecedented. Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
UPI
a day ago
- Politics
- UPI
Mexico's judicial reform raises concerns over judicial independence
May 30 (UPI) -- Nearly 100 million Mexicans are set to take part in an unprecedented election on June 1 that will reshape the country's judiciary. Voters will elect 881 judicial officials, including Supreme Court justices, electoral magistrates, district judges and circuit court magistrates, under a sweeping reform originally pushed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and backed by current President Claudia Sheinbaum. Initially presented in 2014 as a step toward democratizing justice and combating corruption, the reform has drawn mounting criticism from legal experts, academics and civil society organizations. Many warn it could erode judicial independence, increase political interference, and weaken the rule of law. An analysis by Stanford Law School's Rule of Law Impact Lab and the Mexican Bar Association warns that electing judges by popular vote compromises their independence and impartiality by aligning judicial decisions with public opinion rather than strictly with the law. It also highlights the risk that judicial rulings will be influenced by judicial election campaign donors. Academics, legal experts and civil society organizations have raised concerns about the complexity of the electoral process, highlighting several key issues. First, the proposed reform has been criticized for a lack of clear criteria to assess candidates' qualifications. Candidates are only required to hold a law degree, have at least five years of professional experience, no criminal record, and a good reputation. Candidates are also asked to submit a legal essay and letters of recommendation. Studies show that the selected candidates have, on average, 20 fewer years of experience than the judges they are replacing under the reform. Many of the candidates also come from outside the judiciary and lack the training and background needed to carry out judicial duties effectively. Second, voters in Mexico have received limited information despite the complexity of the process, which includes six ballots and more than 7,000 candidates competing for 2,600 local and federal judicial seats. The Judicial Electoral Observatory, or OEJ, has warned that voters are not receiving adequate information, compromising electoral fairness. One factor is that the National Electoral Institute, or INE, received 52% less funding than it requested, limiting its ability to provide outreach and education. The OEJ also criticized the ballot design and inconsistent selection standards across the evaluation committees, saying these issues undermine the legitimacy of the process and make it difficult for voters to make informed choices. Third, the judicial reform has raised serious concerns about the influence of political actors and power groups in the process. The complexity of the changes and the short, eight-month timeline to organize the election may have created openings for political parties to assert control in parts of the country. Organizations including México Evalúa, the Center for Research and Teaching in Economics, or CIDE, and the National Autonomous University of Mexico, or UNAM, have warned that the system could allow political, economic or criminal interests to infiltrate the judiciary, especially in regions where organized crime is strong. Many of the candidates have ties to the ruling party, said Luis F. Fernández, executive director of Practica: Laboratorio para la Democracia, in an interview with CNN en Español. "We've identified others linked to the country's 10 wealthiest businessmen, and more than 15 candidates connected to drug trafficking," he said. The popular election of judges is rare internationally and, where it exists, is usually limited to local or mid-level courts. In most democratic countries, judges are appointed by technical committees, the judiciary or the executive branch with legislative approval. The goal is to preserve judicial independence and prevent politicization. Mexico's proposed model -- a direct, large-scale, nationwide election of judges at all levels, including the Supreme Court -- is unprecedented.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
a day ago
- Politics
- First Post
Mexico votes on Sunday to elect 2,600 judges, candidates with cartel ties in race in first such election
For the first time in history, the people of Mexico will elect almost 2,600 judges and magistrates, including members of the Supreme Court and hundreds of other federal, state, and municipal courts read more A man pushes his bicycle as an electoral propaganda banner hangs from a pedestrian bridge encouraging people to vote, ahead of the judicial and magistrate election, in Mexico City, Mexico. Reuters Mexican voters confront a difficult task on Sunday. For the first time in history, people will elect almost 2,600 judges and magistrates, including members of the Supreme Court and hundreds of other federal, state, and municipal courts. The election will shift the judiciary from an appointment-based system to one in which people select judges. Proponents of the change believe that it makes the system more democratic and addresses issues such as nepotism and corruption. Critics argue that it risks giving the ruling party greater control and opening the courts to candidates who lack expertise and credentials or may be influenced by criminal organisations such as cartels. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The experiment is so ambitious, contentious, and complicated that it is difficult to predict how it will play out: a single day of voting will result in the most extensive judicial change ever carried out by a large democracy. Here's all you need to know about Mexico's judicial elections, including how they operate and why they're important. Why are Mexicans casting ballots to elect judges? The election marks the completion of a difficult process in which Morena, the ruling party, and its supporters amended the Constitution last year to reform the court system. President Andrés Manuel López Obrador introduced the notion of electing judges by popular vote, which his successor, Claudia Sheinbaum, has championed. López Obrador pushed the plan after the Supreme Court blocked some of his government's plans, such as weakening Mexico's electoral watchdog agency and putting the National Guard under military control, and federal judges ordered the suspension of some of his flagship projects due to environmental concerns. López Obrador, enraged by the verdicts, which he deemed politically motivated, asked his supporters to help solidify Morena's control of Congress. The party's huge majority in last year's general election has allowed its members to approve a raft of constitutional amendments that would revamp the judiciary system. How does the electoral process operate? STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Half of Mexico's court will be chosen by voters on Sunday, with the remaining members to be chosen in 2027. Nearly 880 federal judgeships, ranging from district judges to justices of the Supreme Court, will be up for election this year. Furthermore, 19 of the country's 32 states will elect local judges and magistrates to fill around 1,800 positions. More than 7,700 candidates are vying for those positions. Unlike conventional elections, in which political parties can support their candidates' campaigns, aspiring judges are not permitted to utilise public or private funds, requiring them to rely on their own resources and guerilla marketing on social media to get attention. To assist voters, the election commission established an online portal where individuals could learn more about the candidates. Nonetheless, even some proponents of the makeover admit that voters would struggle to make educated decisions among hundreds of relatively unknown candidates. Concerns about democratic decay The passage of the reform legislation sparked weeks of protests by judges and judicial staff, a sharp rebuke from the Biden administration and concerns by international investors, causing the Mexican peso to dip. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Opponents have called on Mexicans to boycott the vote, and the election is projected to have low turnout. The opponents, former judges, legal experts, politicians and foreign observers, say that battling corruption and impunity in the courts is not a bad idea. Most Mexicans agree that the judiciary is rife with corruption. But critics say the ruling party is simply politicizing the courts at an opportune moment, when Sheinbaum is highly popular. Judicial candidates are not allowed to announce their party affiliation and are unable to accept party funds or hold major campaign events. A number of former Morena government officials and allies, however, have posted lists on social media of which ones to elect. Mexico's electoral authority said Wednesday it also had investigated cases of physical guides handed out to potential voters in Mexico City and Nuevo Leon state, something it said could amount to 'coercion.' Will the election improve the justice system? This has been debated for months. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Supporters of the election frequently discuss a corrupt and nepotistic system in which justice is easier to obtain for those who can pay it and hundreds of judges have been co-opted by one or more of Mexico's violent cartels. In fact, Mexicans believe judges are among the country's most corrupt authorities, second only to traffic cops. Proponents argue that an elected-judges system will cut links between certain powerful criminals, corrupt authorities, and members of the elite. Instead, they believe, judges will now prioritise the interests of those who elected them: the Mexican people. While critics concede that Mexico's judiciary faces huge problems and is in need of deep reform, they say this is not the way to fix it. Several experts have suggested that the change will politicise courts that should rule independently, and that the Morena party, which currently controls the presidency and Congress, will exercise exceptional power over the vote. They have also claimed that a system of direct elections risks allowing unqualified people to become judges and opens the door to more cartel control. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Opening a Pandora's box' Others warn that the overhaul could open the judiciary to questionable judges and allow organized crime to further influence Mexico's justice system. A number of candidates have raised eyebrows. Chief among them is Silvia Delgado García, a former lawyer for drug kingpin Joaquín 'El Chapo' Guzmán, who is running to be a criminal court judge in the northern border state of Chihuahua. Critics 'speak out of ignorance because whether or not I've represented some person doesn't transform you into that person,' she told the AP as she handed out campaign flyers to people crossing the border from Ciudad Juarez to El Paso, Texas. 'What I can promise you is I'll be an impartial judge,' she told some voters. Watchdogs also say that last year's vote on the reform was rushed through, criteria for candidates wasn't always followed, the number of candidates was limited by a lottery and lower-court orders trying to keep the reforms from taking effect were ignored. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD When will the results be known? Mexico uses paper ballots for voting, and each one needs to be manually tallied. The results for the federal court, including the Supreme Court, will be announced in the days after the vote, in contrast to other Mexican elections when preliminary results are known on election night. The national vote counts that will determine the final results will be held on June 15.
