President Claudia Sheinbaum said Sunday that Mexico is “perhaps” the most democratic country in the world given that it will hold judicial elections in 2025.
Speaking at an event in Tlaxcala, Sheinbaum highlighted that a number of constitutional reforms were approved by Congress in recent months, allowing Mexico to “recover the social sense” and the “patriotic sense of our Constitution.”
“Thanks to senators and deputies, this year something unique in Mexico and the whole world was approved. Next year, on June 1, thanks to one of the reforms to the Constitution, the judicial power will be elected by the people of Mexico,” she said, eliciting cheers and applause from attendees of the event in Panotla, Tlaxcala.
Sheinbaum noted that Mexico’s president and lawmakers are already “democratically elected” before emphasizing that the nation’s judges will soon be chosen by citizens as well.
“Now judges, magistrates and Supreme Court justices will be elected democratically. This makes us perhaps the most democratic country there is on the face of Earth,” she said.
“Our adversaries say there is authoritarianism but how [can there be] if it is the people who decide? Democracy is government of the people by the people for the people. And now the judicial power will serve the people of Mexico and the nation as it should have always done,” Sheinbaum said.
The president, like her predecessor Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has argued that judicial reform was needed to rid the nation’s courts of corruption and other ills. López Obrador submitted the reform proposal to Congress in February and signed it into law two weeks before he left office at the end of September. A second round of judicial elections in 2027 will follow those scheduled to take place on June 1, 2025.
Critics assert that the election of judges will lead to the politicization of Mexico’s judiciary. In a nutshell, they argue that Mexico’s courts will come to be dominated by judges sympathetic to the ruling Morena party’s agenda, thus removing an essential check on government power.
Candidates for judgeships will be selected by the president, the Congress — which is currently dominated by Morena — and the judiciary itself. In 2025, citizens will elect a total of 881 federal judges, including nine justices who will sit on the bench of the Supreme Court, two fewer than is currently the case.
“On June 1 next year,” Sheinbaum said on Sunday, “together we will elect justices of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation.”
“It is something historic,” she added.
The government has also faced criticism over some of the other reforms that were recently approved by Congress, including one that eliminated seven watchdog agencies.
Government critics have long argued that the incorporation of autonomous agencies into ministries and other federal departments would eliminate important counterweights to executive power and represent a backward step for democracy.
Sheinbaum has said that the reform will lead to “more transparency” and help to eliminate corruption while generating significant savings for the public purse.
Mexico News Daily
I agree with this 100%! Look at the USA…the president, whoever is in charge at the time chooses judges that can be in power until the day they die. Wrong! Thanks Mexico for leading the way.👍❤️
Totally agree- and I doubt that a future Mexican Supreme Court will award a future Mexican President absolute immunity for crimes committed while in office!
I agree as well. What an exciting time to live in a country that treats all its people equally. This is why I moved to Mexico. I just hope that this very important news source can Stay objective and void the pressure from wealthy American donors. So far so good.
Nonsense. There’s a reason why the international financial markets feel otherwise and thus the devaluation of the peso.
This is where the peso was 2 years ago, and where it should be.
Let me ask you this, if you were a foreign company would you rather pay your employees at 16 pesos to the dollar or $20? It really makes sense for the nearshoring that’s going on.
Mexico’s future looks very bright
New elected judges may well be sympathetic to Morena – since the vast majority of voters chose Morena in fair elections to be their national and state leaders. Where else is a president’s approval rating above 70%? So is the argument that judges should be ones who oppose Morena’s agenda, in order to be “an essential check on governmental power”? If so, I guess MND staff think that judges in the US should be Democrats to check Republican power?
Exactly!
Exactly. Bravo Mexico for leading by example.
Government should be elected by the people for the people and of the representative people.
Compare this to the so called “democratic systems” around the world where governments are bought and paid for by the highest bidder in order to serve their agenda.
Aspire to true democracy . . . eliminate the corrupt cartels who assassinate freely the politicians and political hopefuls who do not go along with their agenda. Then Mexico will be on its way to being a shining beacon.
It would be easier to eliminate the cartels if the US stopped bringing guns to Mexico. Also if they could just stop the consumption in the US the whole problem would ease? Unfortunately, the US has no intention of eliminating synthetic drugs. They’d rather blame Mexico.
I agree there are far too many guns in the <USA and if the cartels can get drugs into the USA they can get guns out. Furthermore, there is a huge drug consumption problem in the US. That must be addressed. But it will take decades. Meanwhile, already the cartels have expanded into agriculture, fishing, oil, and have been in the extortion and murder business for many years.
Oh, they’ll double their efforts when it comes to the election of judges.
President Sheinbaum is a serious person but in this case she is intentionally ignoring the risks associated with electing judges such as not electing qualified persons and accidentally electing those who might be controlled by cartels. She will never undermine AMLO but she will own the resulting risks and problems if they are realized. I believe this election is unrealistic to execute because of the number of positions, 880, and the impossibility that ordinary citizens know what qualifies persons to be judges. I hope I am wrong and she is right…but I do think so
Comparatively speaking, consider the quality of the perversely corrupt SCOTUS Justices such as Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh – I doubt that a Mexican electorate so well educated by AMLO’s mañaneras would likely elect even remotely as bad as those in the EEUU. In my view Mexico represents the single most exciting democratic project in the world- a stark contrast to the profane vulgarity of Trump’s corrupt government of billionaires for the benefit of billionaires.
I wholeheartedly agree. Mexico may make some mistakes but AMLO’s transparency and his commitment to the education of the Mexican people was tireless. La Presidenta is no less committed. I live in a tiny pueblito outside a moderately large town. The mañaneras have become part of our daily life as one can hear them playing on speakers from most of our businesses. I only wish the population in my home country paid such close attention. Carol Hopkins
Judicial reform was a must. These judges were mere jail door attendants for the highest bidder. The opposition’s supppsed argument is simply a smoke screen.
Mexico is not a democracy it’s under the control of one entity the cartels .et al
The reason the US is a Republic and not a Democracy is just this. When all the power is in the hands of a single party all you get is authoritarianism. This has been played out from the time humans first had governments. I guess it has to happen again for Mexico to learn this lesson. Unfortunately, if you disagree with Morena, not only will you be put in jail but now they have the backing of the cartels. Sad.
Political Dialogue KONRAD ADENAUER STIFTUNG
Agenda | Opinion
One more step towards authoritarianism in Mexico
The erosion of autonomous bodies represents a wake-up call for democracy and freedom.
By: Julio Castillo Lopez
Dec 16, 2024
Original article in Spanish. Translation performed by artificial intelligence.
The consolidation of a totalitarian regime is defined by absolute control of power, the elimination of checks and balances, and the suppression of dissenting voices. In Mexico, the recent elimination of autonomous bodies and democratic mechanisms, which function as checks and balances, marks a worrying setback in terms of governance and the rule of law. This phenomenon not only threatens democratic freedoms . It also undermines trust in institutions , creating fertile ground for totalitarianism.
Autonomous bodies emerged little by little in a process of gradual democratization in Mexico. Perhaps the most obvious example is the National Electoral Institute (INE) created in 2014. Before, elections were organized by a commission from the Ministry of the Interior. But it was absurd that the government itself was the organizer and, at the same time, competed in them.
With a lot of work by the opposition and some democratic will from those in power, this function was removed from the government. Transparency and its institutions were a conquest of the first democratic government of Mexico in 2000, of Vicente Fox. The National Commission of Human Rights was also a conquest of the opposition in 1990, after Baja California was recognized as the first state of the Republic won by the opposition. Each institution had its history and its reason for being.
In Mexico, institutions such as the INE, the National Institute for Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (INAI), and economic regulators have for years guaranteed impartiality and transparency in government decision-making . Even more so in decision-making in which the government is directly interested. However, the centralization of power in the Executive has resulted in a progressive decrease in its autonomy . This weakening is not accidental; it responds to a pattern of disjointed or subordinate bodies.
[Read also: Mexico: Civil society in the face of authoritarian populism
The case of the INE is paradigmatic because it is in charge of organizing the elections. The electoral reform prior to the elections reduced its operational and budgetary capacity. In addition, it called into question its competence to guarantee free and fair elections. It was not eliminated. But by weakening this institution, the door is opened for the Executive to exercise more direct control over the electoral processes . The possibility of alternation was reduced and the permanence of the party in power was strengthened.
What was removed?
The battle to remove the checks and balances did not begin with the reform that eliminated autonomous bodies. The National Commission on Human Rights (CNDH) was the first institution to be colonized, when, against the law, Rosario Piedra was put in charge of the body, which is aligned with the government of the president at the time, Andrés Manuel López Obrador . Then came the reform that weakened the INE, also led by someone loyal to the government of the ruling Morena party . Recently, through legislative reform, the Judiciary was dismantled . Seven institutions have been closed in this way.
The Federal Economic Competition Commission , in charge of preventing the formation of monopolies, will result in fewer options for products and services, and higher prices.
The Federal Institute of Telecommunications , in charge of regulating the matter and granting radio spectrum, could also result in fewer options and higher prices, as well as the loss of neutrality and freedom of expression.
The National Council for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy, in charge of measuring poverty in its different dimensions. The closure of this institution will result in the manipulation of official data and the loss of reliable indicators.
The National Hydrocarbons Commission , designed to ensure the maximization of the value of hydrocarbons, allowed for orderly and convenient work of state-owned companies, which are bankrupt.
The Energy Regulatory Commission , which regulates the energy market in which the State is the largest competitor, could limit competition in addition to affecting tariffs.
The National System for Continuous Improvement of Education , an institution that has not been autonomous for five years. The educational reform eliminated the National Institute for Educational Evaluation and also the possibility of knowing the educational level. To replace it, they opened this institution, so useless that they have already closed it.
The National Institute for Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (and its 32 local institutes). This must be the most aggressive change to consolidate a totalitarian power. Now it will no longer be possible to demand accountability, information and results from the government . Most of the corruption scandals that have been known are achieved by obtaining information from this institute. Now it will be the government itself that defines what data to share and what data to reserve.
Road to totalitarianism
Totalitarianism does not emerge abruptly. It is built on gradual changes that concentrate power in a few hands. In Mexico, the process of centralization and destruction of checks and balances threatens democracy and creates the ideal conditions for the establishment of a totalitarian regime. This phenomenon should not be ignored. Institutional weakening not only affects the present, but also compromises future generations.
The erosion of autonomous bodies represents a wake-up call for all those who value democracy and freedom. This is not a partisan struggle, but rather a defense of the fundamental principles that sustain a just and equitable society .
It is essential that civil society , political actors and international organizations pay attention to this process. The defense of autonomous bodies and checks and balances is not only a fight for democracy, but for respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law. Strengthening institutions, promoting dialogue and citizen oversight are essential to halt this advance towards totalitarianism and preserve the nation’s democratic legacy.
Julio Castillo Lopez
Graduate in Philosophy and Master in Communication. General Director of the Rafael Preciado Hernández Foundation of Mexico.
well my first part is missing, however the important piece is here
Which of the two countries (US, Mexico) do you consider to be freer? Serious question.
Quotes from this article:
“Our adversaries say there is authoritarianism but how [can there be] if it is the people who decide? Democracy is government of the people by the people for the people.”
“Totalitarianism does not emerge abruptly. It is built on gradual changes that concentrate power in a few hands. In Mexico, the process of centralization and destruction of checks and balances threatens democracy and creates the ideal conditions for the establishment of a totalitarian regime. This phenomenon should not be ignored. Institutional weakening not only affects the present but also compromises future generations.”
Having elections does not mean there is a democracy. Dictatorships always have elections. The USA is a good example of elections which are bought by billionaires. The electoral college in the USA does not seek democracy, it has nothing to do with it. How many of the people(both left and right) are represented in the government , in each district. Many comments mention balance of power as necessary for a democracy. Elected judges without “superior qualifications to run” and backed by parties leads to corruption. An essential part of democracy is term limits. A good appeals system in the judiciary are necessary. The more independent from the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, an electoral commission, and the Dept of Justice is from the governing bodies is essential. Democracy is one person one vote, Neither is a majority vote democracy where one group lords it over winning by 52-48%. A sign of a democracy is how well the 48% are represented after an election.
The arguments for judicial elections from both sides could be valid and will be determined by how they are applied in the future.
But where is an explanation for how removing watchdog agencies could possibly be beneficial to democratic control of the government. Any party or government official that advocates this is obviously supporting authoritarianism and is against open democratic principles.
The abandonment of an independent judiciary may be more “democratic” but comes at the price of abandoning the rule of law. “Democracy” is, at best a process – not an end in itself. I subscribe to Plato’s view (of Athenian democracy). There is no such thing, what “democracy” really is is an aristocracy of orators who can lead the mob.
This will not end well for Mexico and Mexicans.
Please evaluate further?