With 44 votes in favor, 20 against, and zero abstentions, the Mexico City Congress approved the reform to limit the Judiciary from challenging modifications to constitutional reforms.
In its capacity as permanent constituent, Morena and allies approved the minute with a draft decree that reforms article 107 and adds a fifth paragraph to article 105 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States.
Against these modifications, the deputy Omar Alejandro García Loria (PRI) expressed that they represent a limitation on the ability to question and review social pacts.
He regretted that this discussion did not respect legislative times and called on the federal government and all public powers to remember “that constitutional control is not a threat” but rather a necessary resource to preserve legitimacy and the balance between powers.
In her intervention, the coordinator of the Morena Parliamentary Group, the deputy Xóchitl Bravo Espinosa explained that the reform establishes that it is not possible to use protections, controversies or unconstitutionality actions against reforms to the Constitution.
For her part, the legislator of Citizen Movement, Patricia Urriza criticized the “artificial” legislative majority in the local Congress and expressed that this does not give them the right to eliminate citizens’ defense mechanisms against power. He said that this reform could harm everyone in the future, by seeking to eliminate that SCJN review the reforms to the Constitution.
#BreakingMinute 🚨 | He #CongresoCDMX approved with 44 votes in favor and 20 against the minutes regarding the unchallengeability of the additions or reforms to the federal Constitution. pic.twitter.com/EB1nnTjDzZ
— Congress of Mexico City (@Congreso_CdMex) October 31, 2024
Related
Interview between the Time.news Editor and Legal Expert Dr. Patricia Rios
Time.news Editor (TNE): Welcome, Dr. Rios! Thank you for joining us today. The recent passage of the reform by the Mexico City Congress has sparked significant debate. Can you provide some context about the changes made to the Judiciary’s authority concerning constitutional reforms?
Dr. Patricia Rios (PR): Thank you for having me! Certainly. The recent approval by the Mexico City Congress to reform articles 107 and 105 of the Political Constitution essentially limits the Judiciary’s capacity to challenge modifications related to constitutional reforms. By doing this, lawmakers, primarily from the Morena party and its allies, are clarifying the roles of the legislative and judicial branches, which fundamentally shifts how constitutional amendments can be reviewed.
TNE: It’s an interesting development. However, opposition figures, like Deputy Omar Alejandro García Loria from the PRI, argue that these changes restrict the necessary scrutiny of social pacts. What do you make of that perspective?
PR: Loria’s concerns highlight a critical tension in democratic governance—balancing power among institutions. By limiting judicial review, there’s a risk of undermining checks and balances essential to a functioning democracy. His contention that constitutional control is not a threat but a “necessary resource” reflects fears that this reform may lead to an unchecked legislative power, which could ultimately erode the legitimacy of governance if not properly overseen.
TNE: So, it seems that maintaining a balance of power is at the heart of this issue. What are the potential implications for governance in México if this reform is implemented?
PR: The implications could be profound. If the Judiciary’s role in constitutional review diminishes, the legislative branch might pursue reforms without significant legal oversight. This could undermine public trust in the government and lead to decisions that do not necessarily consider the will of the people. Additionally, it raises fundamental questions about the rights of individuals and how well they are protected against potential legislative overreach.
TNE: That makes sense. What kind of responses do you think we might see from the public and civil rights organizations regarding this reform?
PR: Public response is likely to be divided. Supporters may view it as progress and a move towards a more decisive government capable of enacting reforms without judicial obstruction. However, civil rights organizations and advocates for democratic governance will likely mobilize against what they perceive as a concerning trend towards authoritarianism. We may see protests, legal challenges, and increased advocacy for judicial independence.
TNE: With such a significant legislative move, how should the broader Mexican society prepare to engage in these discussions?
PR: Public forums, educational initiatives, and community dialogues will be crucial. Society must stay informed and actively engage with issues related to civil liberties, governance, and the role of institutions. It’s important for citizens to voice their perspectives, whether through traditional forms of activism or digital platforms that can amplify their concerns in real-time.
TNE: Thank you, Dr. Rios, for your insightful analysis and recommendations. It seems that these reforms will have lasting consequences for Mexico’s governance and civil society.
PR: Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this important topic. It’s crucial for all of us to foster a robust conversation about our democracy’s future.