Background on the Judicial Reform and Its Implementers
In previous columns, I addressed numerous practical issues that could arise when implementing the flawed judicial reform approved last year. The evident purpose behind this reform was to eliminate checks on the highly concentrated power of Morena. However, structural problems were anticipated for its implementation, casting doubt on its practical viability.
Challenges Faced by Judicial Candidates
The judicial positions were expected to be unattractive for candidates, even those with political protection or influence. These positions implied low salaries, little job security, a heavy workload, and potential pressure from politicians or organized crime. The guaranteed wear and tear on elected judges combined with the brief requirements to prove their competence and preparation created a recipe for failure. Moreover, the transition process added complexity.
A Year Later: Problems Materialize
One year after the reform, all the predicted problems have manifested organically. Despite this, Morena refuses to acknowledge that it has seized more power than it can handle.
- Lack of Resources: The INE struggled to organize the election due to insufficient resources.
- Low Public Interest: There was a lack of general interest in participating in the contest. Candidates failed to register as the deadline approached, and voter turnout was at an all-time low. Despite massive publicity efforts by the regime, it couldn’t reverse the trend.
- Voting Irregularities: The few who voted did so using “acordeones” (ballots with multiple selections), for which Morena has yet to provide a consistent explanation.
Judge Resignations: A Growing Concern
Despite the party’s valiant efforts to connect the people with the judiciary, several resignations have been reported just days before the elected judges assume their positions. At least six judges have resigned, including two in Tamaulipas (civil matter), one in Durango, and another in Veracruz (labor matter), having served less than two weeks.
While most haven’t explicitly stated their reasons, some allude to personal issues. A common thread among those who resigned is the lack of a clear judicial career path.
The Demanding Nature of Judicial Work
Judging is not as glamorous as depicted in movies. It involves meticulously reviewing case files, defining and limiting litigation, evaluating evidence according to established criteria, and most importantly, understanding and studying the law. The reality of judicial work does not align with the expectations set by the reform.
Uncertain Future for Judicial Positions
The reform, riddled with deficiencies, leaves room for ambiguity in legislation. In some states, second-place election candidates will replace judges, while in others, secretaries will be appointed as judges, casting doubt on the democratic legitimacy that allegedly justified the reform.
What is clear is that the arrogance with which legislators conducted the judge removal lottery, claiming to bring justice closer to the people while secretly reveling in their power play, has deteriorated into a pathetic spectacle. The very discourse that underpinned the reform has crumbled transparently and organically.
