### Judicial elections in Mexico: towards a new democratic era or a threat to judicial independence?
Mexico is preparing to experience an unprecedented event on June 1, 2024: nearly 100 million voters will be called upon to directly designate their judges and magistrates, a radically new system which could redefine the relationship between the judiciary and the rest of the state. Coming from a reform promoted by the power of the left, this initiative raises questions both on its implications for democracy and on its consequences for the integrity of the judicial system.
#### A historical context
Historical, this reform is part of a context of growing mistrust of Mexican judicial institutions, often perceived as corrupt or influenced by political interests. Since the coming to power of Andrés Manuel López Obrador in 2018, the watchword has been the fight against corruption, a scourge which, according to the defenders of the Reformation, plays the judicial system. However, this approach raises legitimate concerns about the separation of powers, a fundamental element of democracy.
It is important to note that this type of designation mechanism is rare worldwide. If countries like Bolivia allow the election of high magistrates, ordinary judges are traditionally appointed by processes less likely to influence their impartiality. Portugal, on the other hand, proceeds to the appointment of its judges via an independent commission, thus guaranteeing their autonomy. This contrast highlights the uniqueness of the system proposed by Mexico and the audacity that such an innovation represents.
#### An unprecedented electoral campaign
The 3,422 candidates for these elections will have a major challenge. Forced to rely widely on social networks, without access to traditional media or public rallies, their campaign takes on a whole new form. This choice reflects both an adaptation to new technologies and an attempt to reduce campaign costs, thus contributing to a certain equity between the candidates. Nevertheless, this approach is also indicative of an increasing isolation of judicial actors, cut off from social discussions which often take place in public forums.
In addition, the capacity of campaign expenditure, which varies between 10,800 and 72,000 dollars, strengthens this potential inequality by perhaps promoting those who already have a solid financial support network.
#### A reform criticized beyond borders
Critics of the reform are not limited to political rivals in Mexico. International organizations and legal experts, including in the United States, express concerns about its ability to maintain judicial independence. The concern grows around the implications that this could have for the legal security of foreign investments in a country where corruption remains omnipresent.
Internationally, the debate around the election of judges highlights a central dilemma: how to strengthen the integrity of the judicial system while preserving its impartiality? Indeed, if the popular election of judges may seem an advance towards greater transparency, it also raises the question of their potential dependence on votes and popular interests.
### support for a majority policy
President Claudia Sheinbaum, carried by a large popularity following her election, benefits from popular support which seems to obscure judicial concerns. His relatives, at the head of a majority in Parliament and in most Mexican states, enjoy legitimacy that could sweep dissensions within the population. Surveys suggest that almost 85 % of Mexicans approve of its policy.
However, this majority approach could also generate a appeasement of criticisms on democratic drift. In such a climate, it is crucial that citizens are not only prepared to elect their judges, but also informed of the consequences that these decisions could have on the country’s judicial architecture.
### towards an unstable balance?
The judicial elections in Mexico represent an unprecedented test for democracy and independence of justice. While the general mobilization is set up, it is essential to wonder if this reform will be the occasion for a real regeneration of judicial institutions or if it will end up weakening the judicial system. In a way, these elections could symbolize a new chapter of a quest for responsibility and honesty within the government, but they also raise the spectrum of an instrumentalization of justice at the service of a majority.
In the end, beyond this reform, there is a wide reflection to be conducted on the very nature of democracy in Mexico. Civic commitment of citizens in the choice of judges is crucial, but constant vigilance is necessary to ensure that this reform does not erode the very foundations of the rule of law. What is played out on June 1 could be much more than a simple vote – it could be the redefinition of a system which must at all costs remain independent and equitable.