From the reform initiatives to the secondary laws for the implementation of the Constitutional reform to the Judicial Branch of the Federation | Part 2

Executive Summary:

• Pursuant to the Decree of constitutional reform regarding the Judiciary, on November 20, 2024, the President of the Republic presented three initiatives before the Senate, which were referred to the Joint Committees of Justice and Legislative Studies.
• While the reform initiatives seek to guarantee the principles of legality, objectivity, certainty, transparency and impartiality in the process of electing positions in the Judicial Branch of the Federation, The truth is that they fail to address factual and legal issues such as the administrative challenges that the reform will face, the possible politicization of the judicial system, among others.

On September 15, 2024, the Decree of constitutional reform on the Judiciary was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation. Following up on this reform, on November 20, 2024, the President of the Republic presented three initiatives to the Senate. These initiatives correspond to: (i) the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch of the Federation; (ii) the Judicial Career Law of the Judicial Branch of the Federation; and (iii) Various reforms and additions to the General Law on Administrative Responsibilities, among which the following changes and additions stand out:

• Organic Law of the Judicial Branch of the Federation: In order to implement and regulate the constitutional reform in secondary legislation, the structure and powers of the organs of the Judicial Branch of the Federation are redefined. This new Law is intended to replace the one approved by Congress just 3 years ago. Among others, the following key points stand out:
  • Organs of the Judicial Branch of the Federation: They are the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, the Electoral Court, the Regional Plenums, the Circuit Collegiate Courts, the Collegiate Courts of Appeal, the District Courts, the Judicial Disciplinary Court and the Judicial Administration Body. The Law establishes the provisions relating to the structure, integration, operation and powers of each of these bodies.
  • Popular Election of Judges: It reiterates what is established in the Constitution regarding the fact that judges, magistrates, and ministers will be elected by popular vote, transforming the current appointment process and raising doubts about judicial independence, since electoral processes can subject judges to political dynamics that are incompatible with the impartiality of justice.
  • Judicial Disciplinary Court: It grants this body the power to investigate, substantiate and resolve cases of administrative responsibility, ensuring internal controls over judges. However, its structure and scope could generate excessive burdens and duplication of functions with other bodies.
  • Judicial Administration Body: It introduces an autonomous body in charge of managing human, material and financial resources of the Judiciary, with the additional mission of preventing and eradicating gender violence and sexual harassment within it. Although its creation is pertinent, its relationship with other administrative bodies could generate confusion in its implementation.
• Judicial Career Law of the Judicial Branch of the Federation: It regulates the processes of entry, training, promotion, evaluation and permanence in the judicial career under principles of merit, equality and gender perspective. Its characteristics include:
  • Strengthening the National School of Judicial Training: It is proposed as an axis for the professionalization of members of the Judiciary, as well as members of prosecutors and police forces. However, this approach requires a robust infrastructure, significant resources and detailed planning, elements that could become complicated in a context of budgetary austerity.
  • Periodic Evaluations and Transparency: The law seeks to ensure that judges meet standards of excellence. However, it lacks clear provisions on the impact of evaluations on the job security of members, which could lead to legal uncertainty.
• Reforms to the General Law of Administrative Responsibilities: These amendments seek to adapt the administrative responsibilities of public servants of the Judiciary to the requirements of the constitutional reform. The main changes include:
  • Supervision of the Judicial Disciplinary Court: This body will take control of administrative responsibility procedures, centralizing functions that were previously handled by various bodies. This could lead to operational overload and conflicts of jurisdiction.
  • Ethical Conduct Review: The ethical framework has been expanded to include principles such as gender perspective and respect for human rights. However, the law does not establish objective criteria to evaluate these behaviors nor define proportional sanctions, which could lead to arbitrary actions.

The initiatives to reform the judiciary represent an attempt to profoundly transform justice in Mexico; however, we believe that they suffer from technical flaws and legislative omissions that compromise their implementation. The lack of foresight regarding administrative challenges, the possible politicization of the judicial system, and the contradictions with constitutional principles generate a scenario of uncertainty that could perpetuate the problems they seek to resolve. Although it is necessary to reform our justice system, these initiatives require substantive adjustments to guarantee their effectiveness, legal viability, and alignment with the principles of a democratic State of law.