Jorge Alcocer V.
Confusion has dominated the debate over constitutional reform, which aims to remove all judicial bodies and replace them with those elected by popular vote between 2025 and 2027.
The reform was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation (DOF) and officially came into force on 16 September. However, federal judges have granted more than 160 protections that, in various forms, order a stay of their petitions, including those directed to the INE to prevent it from carrying out preparatory actions for the June 2025 elections, and the one that caused more controversy, causing a judge to order the Mexican President to remove the Reform Decree from the Treasury Department.
The confusion stems both from the poor drafting of the rules included in the Constitution, and from the notorious errors and contradictions that the legislators of Morena and the allies missed due to haste without rational justification, and from the contempt with which the head of the Federal Executive and the legislators who have a majority in two houses of the Congress of the Union.
Contempt of the President must be justified by the fact that, under the law, judges do not have the power to grant protection from constitutional reforms.
This rule exists, but it must be applied by the judiciary. It is unacceptable and unjustifiable for the President and her legislators to take the law into their own hands without complying with the decisions of the judges. Strictly speaking, it would be appropriate for them to apply to the bodies created by law to resolve such disputes.
What we see in action is a kind of presidential and legislative lynching of the judiciary. This is an unprecedented constitutional crisis.
The confusion is compounded by the Senate’s approval of a constitutional reform initiative designed to cover up what the ruling party has already approved in judicial matters. What Morena and his allies eventually approved in the Senate was the inclusion in Magna Carta of what was contained in the Law of Amparo. However, the transitional article of the decree in question establishes the following:
“SECOND. “The matters pending shall be resolved in accordance with the provisions contained in this decree.”
What corresponds to legal certainty in a constitutional state is that ongoing judicial or administrative proceedings are not affected by changes in legal norms. That is, this transition should say that the problems pending shall be decided in accordance with the provisions contained in the Constitution and laws applicable at the time of their initiation. This is called “not retroactive”.
The hasty new reform, amended at the morning conference by the President, aims to handcuff the current Court in the decisions it makes, where appropriate, regarding ongoing amparo proceedings, and to put maximum pressure on it. to the fact that in cases of unconstitutionality and constitutional disputes awaiting resolution, 8 votes were not obtained to invalidate the Decree published on September 15.
Let us recall that in 2009, on the basis of decisions made on appeals against the electoral reform of 2007-2008, the Plenum of the Supreme Court approved judicial practice on electronic registration No. 165713, which established that constitutional reform is a procedure if it is subject to control by the Court itself. It’s a matter of judgment.
There is debate within and outside the judiciary as to whether the Supreme Court, faced with changes to the Constitution that are contrary to the fundamental principles of the Republic or human rights, can look into the merits of the case and declare invalid what has been approved by the body reforming the Constitution.
4T representatives claim that the legislature is “sovereign” and has “supremacy” over the judiciary.
This is not what Morena legislators said when they were in opposition, or in the early years of 4T. Reason and experience say that power without checks and balances is incompatible with the rule of law and democracy.
This is a “snake egg”. The origins of authoritarianism and dictatorship.
Follow me on: www.vozyvoto.com.mx
Source: Aristegui Noticias
John Cameron is a journalist at The Nation View specializing in world news and current events, particularly in international politics and diplomacy. With expertise in international relations, he covers a range of topics including conflicts, politics and economic trends.