Executive Summary:
- In the context of the recent elections and the upcoming formation of the Congress of the Union, the discussion on the constitutional reform proposal presented on February 5, 2024 to reform the Judicial Branch of the Federation has been revived.
- The initiative, in its current form, represents a significant risk to the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.
As a result of the recent election and the possible formation of the next legislature of the Congress of the Union, the discussion on the constitutional reform initiative presented on February 5, 2024 to “reform” the Judicial Branch of the Federation was reactivated.
The main axes on which this initiative is based are the following:
- A new integration of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (“SCJN”). The number of Ministers is reduced from 11 to 9, so that they function only in Plenary Session.
- Election by popular vote of Ministers, Magistrates and Judges. Extraordinary election in For Ministers, Magistrates of the Electoral Tribunal and Magistrates of the Disciplinary Tribunal, the following would be proposed:
- 10 candidates for the Executive Branch
- 5 candidates for each chamber of Congress
- 10 candidates for the SCJN Plenary (by majority of 6 votes)
The rest of the Magistrates and Judges from 6 candidates per position (2 for each Power of the Union).
- Eliminate the Federal Judiciary Council, replacing it with a Judicial Disciplinary Court (5 elected Magistrates) and a Judicial Administration Body (5 people appointed, one by the President, one by the Senate and three by the SCJN).
- Procedural rules. A maximum period of 6 months is established for the resolution of tax matters and 1 year for criminal matters. It is prohibited to grant suspensions against laws with general effects in amparos, constitutional controversies and actions of unconstitutionality.
It has been announced that discussion of this initiative will begin as soon as the new legislature takes office (September 1, 2024), with a view to its approval, if appropriate, in the first session. There is also the proposal to convene various sectors (universities, bar associations, business sector, members of the Judiciary, etc.) to discuss the proposal and dialogue on the best way to reform the Judiciary.
We believe that the initiative, as it stands, poses a serious risk to the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary and calls into question the rule of law as we know it.
We will be closely monitoring the development and progress of this process, keeping you informed of it. If you have any questions about how the above may impact particular matters, we will be happy to advise you.
