Mexico City is abuzz following a recent controversial election aimed at overhauling the country’s court system. President Claudia Sheinbaum took to the podium on Monday to defend the judicial election process amidst a marred weekend polling effort plagued by low voter engagement, disarray, and disparagement. With polling stations closing their doors on Sunday evening, the nation eagerly awaited the subsequent days when the final results would be unveiled.
Mexico’s electoral commission revealed a mere 13% turnout from the nation’s pool of 100 million eligible voters, a stark dip from more robust participation seen during the presidential election which boasted a 60% turnout last year. Despite this, President Sheinbaum lauded the election as a “complete success,” portraying Mexico as the “most democratic country in the world.”
Political commentators had predicted such low voter turnout given the intricacies and novelties surrounding the electoral choices, as well as the unfamiliar concept of electing judges, which stirred debates questioning the very validity of the election. Departing from the traditional approach where judicial appointments hinged on merit and experience, Mexican citizens were offered the opportunity to select from approximately 7,700 candidates vying for over 2,600 positions within the judicial system.
President Sheinbaum vehemently dismissed critique pointing to a power grab, asserting that the election marks a stride toward heightened democracy while tackling the corruption endemic in a judicial landscape perceived as fundamentally flawed by many locals. This election arrives after Morena, the ruling party, spearheaded an ambitious overhaul of the court system late last year, which incited protests and attracted criticism as some viewed it as an effort to exert political influence over this arm of government.
Rebutting accusations of authoritarian tendencies, the president retorted, “If the objective was to control the courts, why would we hold an election?” Drawing a parallel to past events, she referred to a maneuver by former President Ernesto Zedillo, who had previously expelled Supreme Court judges via decree, replacing them with his selections.
In the streets, the sentiment was mixed; some voters felt the responsibility of participating in an election with potential implications for the nation’s democratic fabric, while others expressed indifference fueled by longstanding corruption and a lack of concise, informative campaigning. Raúl Bernal, a pedestrian in downtown Mexico City, encapsulated the latter by stating, “I’m not interested in voting. Parties and their messages — they come and go. It’s all the same.”
The particularly low turnout on Sunday stirred worries about the political legitimacy of the nascent judicial system, as voiced by Jaime Arellano, an academic figure and former director at the Center for Justice Studies in the Americas. Úrsula Indacochea of the Foundation for Due Process also highlighted symptoms of declining justice standards, manifesting when politicians assail judicial institutions publicly or government bodies begin disregarding court rulings.
Mexico’s former president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, notoriously chastised the judiciary, alleging rampant corruption and curtailing funding during his tenure. Towards the end of his term, he defied court decisions that could impede judicial reforms pushed by his party. This undertaking has drawn parallels with recent developments in other Latin American nations such as Guatemala and Peru, where potential conflicts continue to pose significant threats to judicial impartiality.
With the situation evolving, many watch with bated breath as Mexico maneuvers through these judicial transformations, with its implications poised to ripple across the region.