The president of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN)Norma Piña Hernández, warned that in the country it became a widespread practice to violate the Constitution, disobey judicial orders and threaten judges and ministers with criminal complaints and political trials.
When submitting his second work report, wich would be the last because He will leave his position on August 31the minister-president warned that the judicial reform was approved and implemented without diagnosis, so its positive or negative consequences will be known in the future.
You might be interested in: Tijuana, Juárez, León and Acapulco, the most violent municipalities: MUCD
He asserted that “it became a widespread practice to openly violate the suspensions of federal judges in contravention of the Constitution; it became a recurring practice to threaten judges and ministers with criminal complaints and political trials.”
minister Piña listed the three events for which the majority of ministers where classified as “traitors, corrupt, allies of organized crime”: the annulment of the transfer of the National Guard to the armythe invalidation of the decree that qualifies as national security the mega works of the so-called Fourth Change and the cancellation of Plan B for electoral reform, decisions that were made during the six-year term of Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
The ministers who voted against “what the government perceived as contrary to its political project, We were accused of being traitors, corrupt, allies of rapacious minorities. and organized and white-collar crime, and even allegories were made on coffins of some of us. All of this for exercising our function as constitutional judges and facing society.”
However,“when the Court resolved cases in a manner that was perceived to be favorable to the government,such resolutions were held publicly and,on these occasions,They were called traitors to the country and the people to those who had promoted constitutional means of defense to contest government policies,initiatives or projects”,as in the case in which the reform of the electricity industry was left in force.
The president of the Court questioned what was the conduct of the judges that merited a “persecutory and punitive threat” by political actors and wondered if it was “for resolving cases in ways that they considered contrary to their wishes and interests; for granting suspensions and precautionary measures which in essence may or may not coincide in its grantingbut which are provided for in the Amparo Law; for daring to admit means of defense – to which we are obliged by law – brought by political minorities or by people who considered their rights violated by acts of authority or for exercising our deliberative function as a constitutional court.”
He stated that The Judiciary did not refuse a reform and even presented a diagnosis, derived from consultations with various sectors, on security and justice. “Where are the proposals to remedy the deep problems of police institutions and prosecutors’ offices, as well as the attention to the millions of victims of crimes in Mexico and those who, on the other hand, live the horror of the prison system?” he questioned.
He expressed that “reform was needed, but we could not take the easy way out; The complex context that exists in Mexico does not deserve it, much less its consequences, I insist: unpredictable today.” He considered that “No failure justifies the immediate elimination of the judicial career; even less so, the establishment of a system that, according to comparative experience, not only does not contribute to the governance of justice, but also politicizes it.”
You might be interested in: Alicia Bárcena was not informed about the wedding in MUNAL: Semarnat
Norma Piña said that she hopes that “the purpose of this reform, for the good of Mexico, is not to destroy, but to build a better system for the protection of human rights; better control of constitutionality regularity; a better system of counterweights between the powers of the State, all of this for the benefit of society and our country, but this will only be seen over time, which will be when the reform can be fully appreciated and evaluated.”
The president of the Supreme Court closed the second period of sessions, which will take effect on December 13, and called the ministers to a session until January 6, in the context of the organization of the judicial election by which eight members of the High Court presented their resignations and will leave their positions on August 31.
MC
Related
What are the main threats to judicial integrity in Mexico as highlighted by Norma Piña Hernández?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Legal Expert on Judicial Integrity in Mexico
Editor: Good morning, and welcome to Time.news. Today, we have the privilege of speaking with Professor Elena Cortés, a renowned legal expert specializing in constitutional law and judicial systems. We’ll be discussing recent alarming statements from the president of Mexico’s supreme Court of Justice, Norma Piña Hernández, regarding the state of judicial integrity in the country. Thank you for joining us, Professor Cortés.
Professor Cortés: Thank you for having me. It’s a critical time for judicial discourse in Mexico, and I’m glad to be here to shed light on these issues.
Editor: Norma Piña made some striking observations in her recent report. Can you elaborate on her claims about the current climate surrounding judicial orders and the treatment of judges?
Professor Cortés: absolutely. Minister Piña has indicated a deeply concerning trend where it has become “widespread” to disregard the Constitution and defy judicial orders. This isn’t just a matter of political disagreement anymore; it poses a direct threat to the rule of law. By openly threatening judges and ministers with criminal charges or political trials, the independence of our judiciary is at risk, which is a cornerstone of any democracy.
Editor: That’s a sobering assessment. She also highlighted specific actions that have led to judges being labeled as “traitors” or “allies of organized crime.” could you explain what she was referring to?
Professor Cortés: Yes, those accusations stem from pivotal judicial decisions made during President López obrador’s administration. Specifically, these include rulings on the transfer of the National Guard to the military, the invalidation of national security measures concerning significant infrastructure projects, and the rejection of electoral reform initiatives. These decisions were contentious politically,and the backlash from political actors has unluckily manifested in the form of intimidation and threats against the judiciary.
Editor: It seems like the judicial reform and its consequences remain a major concern. How has the lack of a thorough diagnostic before implementing these reforms impacted the judicial landscape?
Professor Cortés: The absence of a extensive analysis prior to enacting judicial reforms is troubling. Without understanding the ancient and sociopolitical context, the reforms risk introducing inefficiencies or, worse, exacerbating existing problems.Minister Piña’s statement signals that we might not fully grasp the implications of these changes until much later, possibly seeing either stabilizing effects or considerable unrest within the judicial system.
Editor: What do you think the implications are for democracy in Mexico if this trend continues?
Professor Cortés: The implications are dire. A strong judiciary is fundamental to uphold citizens’ rights and maintain checks and balances within government structures. If judges live in fear of repercussions, we face a scenario where justice is compromised and the rule of law is weakened. This could lead to increased impunity for powerful actors and an eroded public trust in judicial institutions. Ultimately, we risk sliding into authoritarianism if judicial integrity is continuously undermined.
Editor: It sounds like a critical moment for Mexico. What steps do you believe should be taken to protect judicial independence and restore faith in the legal system?
Professor Cortés: First and foremost, there must be a clear reaffirmation from national government leaders advocating for the sovereignty of the judiciary. Moreover, the establishment of mechanisms to protect judges from political pressure and intimidation is crucial.Engaging civil society in dialog about the role of the judiciary can also help rebuild trust. Transparency and accountability must guide any judicial reform going forward.
Editor: Thank you, Professor Cortés, for sharing your insights today. The situation in Mexico’s judiciary is complex and evolving, and discussions like this are essential for raising awareness and promoting democratic resilience.
Professor Cortés: Thank you for having me.It’s vital we keep this conversation going to support the rule of law and protect our democratic institutions.
Editor: And thank you to our audience for tuning in to Time.news. Stay informed,and we’ll see you next time.