Initiative to Reform the Judicial Branch of the Federation: Implications and risks of the popular election of Judges and Magistrates

Executive Summary:

• The reform initiative proposes to modify articles 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, 116 and 122 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States so that access to the positions of Ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, Magistrates and Circuit Judges, Magistrates and Local Judges, Magistrates of the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Branch of the Federation and Magistrates of the Disciplinary Tribunal, are elected through a popular vote.reform
• If the reform is approved and implemented, the popular election of judicial officials would entail a risk to the administration of justice, legal security in decision-making and impartiality.

Currently, our judicial system is made up of 981 Circuit Magistrates and 599 District Judges at the federal level throughout the country, who resolve an average of 1 cases per year.[1]. At the state level, it is made up of 603 Magistrates and 4,398 Local Judges with an average of 1 cases resolved annually.[2].

It is important to remember that in 2021 the Judicial Career Law of the Judicial Branch of the Federation was enacted, through which a comprehensive scheme was proposed so that Magistrates and Judges are selected by technical capabilities based on rigorous evaluations of knowledge and competencies. This Law includes the implementation of mandatory competitions to advance between each position within the judicial career.

The judicial career has defined the standards for public officials who aspire to occupy the positions of Magistrates and Judges through technical examinations in the subject and continuous training with the aim of performing a specialized function, based on legal knowledge. The judicial career is also considered to have a dual function: i) Maintain continuity and efficiency in its performance; and ii) Guarantee legal security and the proper administration of justice against political or power whims.[3]

However, if the Reform is approved and implemented, a series of risks to legal security and the implementation of a true justice system are noted, since the popular election of Judges and Magistrates does not represent a better administration of justice. Implementing popular election to access positions of Judges and Magistrates would violate the principles of a judicial career based on preparation and study that allows guaranteeing the training of capable legal operators.

The principle of the administration of justice that concerns our Political Constitution of the United Mexican States is precisely to guarantee the correct application of the law and the non-transgression of the sphere of human rights through independent and impartial decision-making. There is no room to consider greater legitimacy if a Judge was or was not elected by popular vote, if his obligation is subject to an interpretation and application of laws. True judicial independence constitutes a right to the neutral administration of justice.[4]

The function of a Judge or Magistrate is exclusively the correct application of the law and the Constitution, seeking to safeguard the human rights of our society. The true legitimacy of these positions is reflected in the quality of their decision-making, with any formal legitimacy of election taking a backseat.

Formal legitimacy would only lead to people without experience and without sufficient knowledge being able to access positions as Judges and Magistrates, resulting in poor decision-making.[5].

If the reform is approved, it could trigger an imminently negative change in the independence of the Judiciary, derived from external and internal interference and conditions in decision-making. The quality of the administration of justice could be seriously undermined if judges and magistrates are appointed without sufficient training to deal with everyday situations in society that involve resolving a legal conflict.

Finally, the Reform implies a significant mobilization in the structure of all Federal and Local Magistrates and Judges, subjecting the evaluation of their performance to the ballot box. This ignores the fact that the constitutional parameter that concerns any Judge is to correctly apply the law and guarantee their human rights.

[1] National Institute of Statistics and Geography INEGI. National Census of Federal Justice Administration 2023 published by the National Institute 2023, available at: https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/cnijf/2023/

[2] National Institute of Statistics and Geography INEGI. National Census of Federal Justice Administration 2023 published by the State Institute 2023, available at: https://www.inegi.org.mx/contenidos/programas/cnije/2023/doc/cnije_2023_resultados.pdf

[3] Nieto, Santiago. 2003. Constitutional principles of the judicial career. Institute of Legal Research of the UNAM. https://revistas-colaboracion.juridicas.unam.mx/index.php/judicatura/article/view/32054/29047

[4] Astudillo, César. 2024 The reform of the Judicial Branch. Effects on the status and mechanics of election - by popular vote of its members. Institute of Legal Research of the UNAM. Technical Analysis of the 20 constitutional and legal reform initiatives presented by the President of the Republic (February 5, 2024) available at: https://archivos.juridicas.unam.mx/www/bjv/libros/15/7483/40.pdf

[5] Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. 2024. Analysis of the Initiative to Reform the Judicial Branch in Mexico. Center for Constitutional Studies SCJN.