SLS’s Rule of Law Impact Lab, Mexican Bar Association, and Inter-American Dialogue Conclude Mexico’s Constitutional Reform Proposals are a Direct Threat to Judicial Independence and the Rule of Law
May 2, 2024 – The Mexican Bar Association, the Stanford Law School Rule of Law Impact Lab, and the Inter-American Dialogue’s Rule of Law Program today issued a report analyzing constitutional reform proposals presented by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to the Mexican Congress in February 2024. The analysis concludes that the proposals directed at the federal judiciary constitute a direct threat to judicial independence, violate international legal standards, and undermine democracy in Mexico.
The proposals advocate for electing judges—including Supreme Court judges—by popular vote, reducing their terms of office, tying their salaries to those of the executive branch, and creating a judicial disciplinary tribunal whose members are elected by popular vote.
“The report’s conclusions are clear: the constitutional reform initiatives presented by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador seek to dramatically affect judicial powers throughout the country, to the detriment of the human rights of all Mexicans. A blow of this magnitude cannot be ignored.” said Víctor Olé Peláez, President of the Mexican Bar Association. “This document will generate awareness of what the loss of judicial independence means for our freedoms.”
The report notes that very few countries in the world elect judges by popular vote. Of these, only Bolivia and the United States use judicial elections to select judges for courts with constitutional jurisdiction. The experience of these two countries confirms that judicial elections compromise the independence and impartiality of the judicial system.
“By politicizing the judiciary, the reform proposals would deny people access to justice,” said Amrit Singh, Professor of Practice and Executive Director of the Rule of Law Impact Lab at Stanford Law School. “Instead of deciding cases impartially and acting as a check on the abuse of power, judges would issue decisions to please powerful constituencies and win more votes. The reform initiatives would endanger the rights of minorities and the rule of law.”
The report points out that electing Supreme Court justices, federal judges and magistrates by popular vote would create incentives for them to issue decisions to satisfy political constituencies instead of impartially deciding cases solely based on facts and law. Reducing judicial tenure to coincide with the six-year presidential term further politicizes the selection of judges. Requiring sitting judges to step down when newly-elected judges take office undermines guarantees of tenure necessary for preserving judicial independence. An elected Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal whose term would coincide with the presidential term, and whose decisions would be final and unappealable, could be weaponized against judges—including judges of the Supreme Court—if they were to issue judgements adverse to the government of the day. The report explains how the proposals violate international legal standards relating to the independence of the judiciary.
On June 2, 2024, Mexico will go to the polls to choose its next president and legislators. A decisive win in legislative elections for the ruling party, Morena, could strengthen its hold on Congress, potentially perpetuating Lopez Obrador’s populist project by further undermining checks and balances. Claudia Sheinbaum, the candidate of the ruling Morena party, has publicly supported voting judges into office, although it remains to be seen to what extent she will implement López Obrador’s policies if she wins.
“During the López Obrador administration, the government has continuously undermined independent institutions that are meant to act as a check on executive power,” said Tamara Taraciuk Broner, director of the Peter D. Bell Rule of Law Program at the Inter-American Dialogue. “As Mexicans head to the polls in elections that are testing Mexican democracy, it is critical to place the protection of judicial independence and the rule of law at the core of any public debate about Mexico’s future.”
About La Barra Mexicana, Colegio de Abogados, A.C (Mexican Bar Association)
La Barra Mexicana, Colegio de Abogados, A.C., is a civil association duly constituted in accordance with Mexican law, whose corporate purpose is to foster in its members, and in society in general, the spirit of equity and the struggle for the full realization of security, justice and the defense of all principles of law, as well as to strive for the improvement of the administration of justice and the correct application of the law.
About the Rule of Law Impact Lab
The Stanford Law School Rule of Law Impact Lab studies and deploys legal tools–litigation and legal research, documentation, and advocacy–in close collaboration with local practitioners and academics to combat democratic decline around the world, including in the U.S. The Rule of Law Impact Lab is inspired by the university-wide Stanford Impact Labs model, which focuses on tackling some of the world’s most pressing challenges through the combined efforts of researchers and policymakers working across a range of disciplines.
About the Inter-American Dialogue’s Rule of Law Program
The Inter-American Dialogue is a non-profit organization that engages its network of global leaders to foster democratic governance, prosperity, and social equity in Latin America and the Caribbean. It works to shape policy debate, devise solutions, and enhance cooperation within the Western Hemisphere. Launched in 2015, the Peter D. Bell Rule of law Program is the Dialogue’s flagship program on democracy, human rights, anticorruption, and citizen security in the Americas.