Mexicans are preparing to vote this Sunday in a historic election that will reshape the country’s judiciary. For the first time, nearly 8,000 candidates will be on the ballot to replace all federal and state judges. This change makes Mexico one of the few nations where judges are elected rather than appointed.
The shift in Mexico’s judicial system stems from ongoing tensions between the government and the courts. Former President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador frequently criticized the judiciary, claiming it was corrupt and politically biased. After the Supreme Court blocked one of his major proposals, Lopez Obrador pushed for a constitutional amendment to make the judiciary more democratic. With strong support from his party, Morena, the amendment passed easily.
Now, Claudia Sheinbaum, the new president and a member of the same party, is backing this reform. This election is significant, especially as it unfolds in a climate where similar tensions are evident in other countries, including the United States.
Voters will face a daunting task as they head to the polls. In the case of the Supreme Court, there are nine positions available but 64 candidates vying for them. Many voters may not know much about these candidates, as there has been little media coverage or advertising to help inform the public. The Electoral Commission has posted candidates’ resumes online, but this means voters will need to do their research before voting.
Concerns have also been raised about candidates with ties to organized crime. Civil society groups have flagged numerous individuals who may have connections to drug cartels. Notably, the former lawyer of infamous drug lord El Chapo is running in Sinaloa, along with others who have past convictions related to drug trafficking. The vetting process for candidates was rushed, leading to complaints about irregularities and inadequate interviews.
Critics of this election format argue that it undermines the independence of the judiciary. Many legal experts believe that separating the judiciary from political influence is crucial for a healthy democracy. Some current justices have voiced their opposition, calling the election a historic mistake that could weaken the judicial system.
Monica Castillejos-Aragon, a former clerk at the Mexican Supreme Court, warns that this move resembles past authoritarian practices in Mexico. She likens it to tactics used by leaders like Viktor Orban in Hungary, suggesting that the ruling party is consolidating power at the expense of judicial independence.
As Mexicans prepare to cast their votes, the implications of this election will likely be felt for years to come. The outcome could significantly alter the landscape of justice in Mexico, raising questions about what kind of judiciary will emerge from this unprecedented electoral process.