Juan Pablo Spinetto warns that President López Obrador will leave the country in a rather uncomfortable situation for his successor Claudia Sheinbaum.
The judges of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation have a hot offer on their desks that effectively amounts to this: Resign in the coming weeks and you can keep your pensions. Or risk competing in an election next year where you will most likely lose these benefits.
If this sounds like not-so-subtle extortion, it’s because it is. At the same time, it is just an insignificant detail in the radical and controversial judicial reform that will subject the country to the experiment of electing its judges—including those of the highest court—by popular vote.
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s world has no room for subtleties, legal technicalities, or consensus-building. In his last five weeks in power, he is pushing for a drastic reform of the Mexican Constitution to leave an indelible nationalist mark on the country’s politics and public life.
Emboldened by the biggest electoral victory since Mexico began having competitive elections, Morena and its allies are moving towards approving a set of significant legal reforms. The result will be less government oversight and public transparency; the loss of autonomy of regulatory bodies, which will once again be under the umbrella of political authorities; greater risks for investment; and a more intrusive role for the military in public security. All in the name of democracy, defending the people, and fighting neoliberalism, of course!
Investors, trade partners, and ordinary Mexicans have reason to be concerned because the result will be greater legal and political arbitrariness. It’s not that the existing rule of law in Mexico was particularly stellar, nor that this will turn the country into a dictatorship, as some argue. But the proposed changes go in the opposite direction of what the nation needs and add volatility at the start of Claudia Sheinbaum’s presidency in October. The peso’s drop of more than 16 percent against the dollar since the presidential elections on June 2, the worst performance among major currencies worldwide, is a sign of strong storms on the horizon.
Let’s look at the judicial system reform: It cuts the requirements and experience needed to be elected as a judge and puts limits on the salaries of new officials, which discourages professionalism. The establishment of deadlines for judges to resolve cases can lead to rushed decisions to avoid reprimands. It’s not far-fetched to imagine pressure groups or even organized crime influencing the election of judges for cases or jurisdictions that may affect their interests. Judges may be tempted to rule based on electoral criteria instead of making impartial decisions. Cases where oral arguments have already been heard will have to be retried if judges are removed, which could harm victims, says Lisa Sánchez, executive director of Mexico United Against Crime, a think tank in Mexico City.
In addition to all these deficiencies (and the list is longer), the process of selecting more than 850 new judges from potentially more than 5,200 candidates in June (and another batch in 2027) will likely paralyze the daily operations of the courts, affecting businesses and ordinary citizens, and adding an extra burden to the new government, which will also have to absorb functions currently performed by autonomous bodies. The current indefinite strike by judicial employees is just a preview of what’s to come.
“There are many reforms that seek to change the institutional structure of the country,” Sánchez told me. “They will leave a very traumatic transition.”
There are valid arguments for pushing a reform: Mexicans do not feel that the legal system works in their favor, with cases dragging on or remaining unresolved. In his disdain for the elites, López Obrador may well think that letting voters choose their magistrates at least reduces the influence of the judicial establishment; polls show that Mexicans like the idea, although this support seems to be waning.
But make no mistake: The underlying reason is that, in López Obrador’s reductionist view, there cannot be a rival bureaucracy that challenges his wisdom and hegemonic project. The Supreme Court has been the most effective counterweight to his power in the last six years by blocking several presidential initiatives. Removing the 11 Supreme Court justices, even those appointed by him, is a revenge of the egocentric president, who probably still has not forgiven the court’s president, Norma Piña, for not standing to greet him during a public event last year. As the national leader of Morena, Mario Delgado, said, approving the reform would be a “great gift” for the outgoing president. No further questions, your honor.
With the new system, high magistrates will think twice before ruling against the president’s wishes, which is a powerful reason for Sheinbaum to support this reform. Some say that the elected president might be privately criticizing her mentor’s excesses. But despite rumors of internal struggles, I still take it to heart when she says she believes the reform will strengthen the judicial system, not the opposite.
This is where Sheinbaum’s first major presidential challenge lies: This viewpoint clashes with the interests of big businesses, Wall Street, and the governments of the United States and Canada, key allies in the USMCA trade agreement. By focusing on the higher courts, the reform is more likely to affect major cases, including corporate disputes, which explains the unusual avalanche of criticism from Mexican and international stakeholders. The result is greater uncertainty around concessions, competition, or tax matters, as highlighted by Morgan Stanley analysts last week. They will need good luck to find the billions of investment the country desperately needs to improve its energy, water, and transportation infrastructure.
As the US ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, concluded, the reform poses a “significant risk” to the functioning of Mexican democracy. López Obrador, never shy about commenting on US internal affairs, quickly denounced the comment as interventionism. In his typical grandiloquent style, he announced a “pause” in his personal relations with Salazar, another dead weight that Sheinbaum will have to carry when she is in power.
In a way, the new administration inherits a paradoxical situation: one of the country’s strongest political mandates overlaps with the most fragile macroeconomic prospects in years, despite Mexico’s great long-term potential. Activity is slowing, inflation remains stubbornly above 5 percent, the fiscal deficit is the largest since the 1980s, the US economy is slowing down, and insecurity is rampant. In my opinion, this is not the time to dismiss the honest concerns that their partners and financiers may have.
No doubt, the Mexican government is free to choose its own course of events, but the country cannot be at the same time an integral part of the North American commercial bloc and a nationalist fortress in which the rule of law depends on political affiliation or passport. Sheinbaum will have to consider her best path forward, especially when the T-MEC is about to be reviewed again in 2026. But ultimately something must give.
Source: El Financiero
