The judicial reform of Mexicowhich provides for judges to be elected by popular vote, is beginning to have disruptive effects on the daily activity of the courts. This week, a state judge Aguascalientes was forced to … resign after having made an error which aroused indignation: in full hearing, he confused the victim with the culprit. This judge was elected in June and is 24 years old.
The new judicial system, promoted by the former president Andrés Manuel López Obradorwas a consequence of the then president’s fight with the Supreme Court, since several initiatives of the government of National Regeneration Movement (Morena) They had been paralyzed before the highest court.
López Obrador’s response was to write into the Constitution that judges would henceforth be elected in elections. The president at the time said it was a demand of the Mexican people, but during the first judicial elections, last June, only 12% of voters came to vote.
The reform was inherited by the current president, Claudia Sheinbaumwho defends it in his speeches so as not to generate fissures in his party’s electorate. But, as ABC has learned, it is suffering the effects in private: the main one is the reluctance of businessmen to invest in the country because they do not trust the new authorities, a decision which affects job creation and growth.
Over the weekend, problems with judicial reform were highlighted by the resignation of Claudio Azul Bañuelos. At just 24 years old, he came to his post after winning the vote in the state of Aguascalientes, in the center of the country.
Bañuelos mistakenly mentioned the victim’s name during the sentencing. Even though he was immediately told he was wrong, the release of the video on social media showed his lack of experience. For the youngest judge in the country, resignation became inexorable.
Errors in court
There have been more cases of problems with new judges. In September, in the courts of Mexico, judge Noah Abarca Munguiawho until before the judicial elections worked as a librarian, mistakenly acquitted the accused in civil proceedings. The decision – and it can never be said better – came during a proceeding which neither the plaintiff nor the defendant had attended. In the middle of the hearing, Abarca Munguía issued a reprimand and concluded the case, unwittingly acquitting the accused. The case also went viral on social media.
In September, still in the capital’s courts, a newly arrived judge, Carlos ZetinaDuring a hearing, he confused basic procedural criminal law terms such as “detention” and “retention.” The mistake was pointed out by a defense attorney and also caused a stir.
From trainee to election judge
Another of the most relevant points is that of Daniel Olvera Lopezwho, thanks to the elections, rose from the status of intern at the Center for Political Rights (Cedepol) to that of federal judge assigned to the Federal Center for Criminal Justice in Coahuilaa state in the north of the country.
The retired judge Marthe Maganawho issued a suspension that ordered a halt to judicial reform last year, analyzed a hearing chaired by current judge Olvera López. Within minutes, he detected at least 15 serious errors and confusions of legal conceptswhich even led the new judge to declare a suspension, since his errors were pointed out even by agents of the Public Ministry.
After these procedural scandals, the judiciary of Mexico gave courses to 137 winners of the judicial election from June 1st. And even though the winners are all lawyers, the problem lies in the lack of experience in the offices where justice is administered. Salaries for judges in Mexico range from 4,000 to 6,000 euros per month.
At the beginning of December, the opposition MP German Martinez and the lawyer Juan Marcos Gutiérrez They denounced before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) that the judicial reform promoted by Morena violates the decisions of this body.
Between interference from drug traffickers and high abstention, inexperienced judges emerged from the June elections and earn between 4,000 and 6,000 euros per month.
“The counter-reforms to the Protection Law of 2024 and 2025, as well as to the Constitution in judicial matters, are in exact contradiction with what was condemned in 2009 and 2010, in addition to defrauding what was reported and approved in accordance in 2015,” they said in a statement.
Furthermore, they emphasized that “the Inter-American human rights system cannot allow fraud, in accordance with the resolutions already adopted. For this reason, we hope not only that new requirements will be established for Mexico to return to the approved international standard, but that in the meantime precautionary measures will be issued so that the judicial election does not continue to apply and that the protection law is applied in its version in force until before the counter-reforms.
About The Author
