Background on the Mexican Judicial Reform
Mexico’s constitutional reform, which establishes the popular election of members for the Federal Judicial Power (PJF), has undermined judicial independence, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW).
Who is Juanita Goebertus?
Juanita Goebertus is the Director for the Americas at Human Rights Watch, an international organization that investigates and exposes human rights abuses worldwide. Her expertise and position make her a relevant voice in discussing the implications of Mexico’s judicial reform.
HRW’s Concerns and Recommendations
HRW urges Mexican authorities to learn from the shortcomings of the 2025 judicial elections and either repeal the constitutional reform or establish robust safeguards to ensure the integrity of the 2027 elections.
- Question:
HRW believes that the reform has undermined judicial independence and may create a loyal judiciary to the government instead of enhancing democracy and efficiency. - Question:
OEA observers pointed out a lack of transparency in campaign financing and expenses, as well as the preselection of six Supreme Court members by the Executive Power Committee and their inclusion in promotional materials distributed physically and virtually to influence voters. - Question:
The reform created a Judicial Discipline Tribunal (TDJ) with broad powers to sanction and remove judges who contradict the Constitution, applicable laws, or established jurisprudence.
International Standards for Judicial Integrity
According to international standards, judges must have guaranteed job tenure and be protected from political influence to ensure that their decisions are based solely on case facts and in accordance with the law.
Impact on Mexican Society
The judicial reform and HRW’s concerns have significant implications for Mexico’s democratic institutions, the rule of law, and citizens’ access to justice. Ensuring judicial independence is crucial for maintaining a fair and impartial legal system.
