Mexicans elect their judges under shadow of crime, corruption
In the western state of Jalisco, 63-year-old housewife Maria Estrada said she used her 'intuition' as she did not know the candidates.
Experts were concerned that the elections would politicise the justice system and make it easier for criminals to influence the courts with threats and bribery.
While corruption already exists, 'there is reason to believe that elections may be more easily infiltrated by organised crime than other methods of judicial selection,' Margaret Satterthwaite, the United Nations special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, told AFP.
Hundreds of opponents of the reforms marched through Mexico City waving flags and banners with slogans including: 'Hands off our democracy' and 'No to electoral fraud'.
The elections send the judiciary 'to its grave,' said Ismael Novela, a 58-year-old company worker.
'It was the last counterweight we had against the totalitarianism of the executive branch.'
President Claudia Sheinbaum has defended the need for the judicial reform, insisting on the eve of the vote that only those who 'want the regime of corruption and privileges' to continue were against it.
Just after polls closed, she called the vote a 'complete success'.
'For the first time in history, almost 13 million Mexican women and men exercised their right to decide the new ministers, magistrates and judges,' Sheinbaum said in a video message posted to social media.
The run-up to the vote was not accompanied by the kind of violence that often targets politicians in Mexico.
But 'it is logical that organised criminal groups would have approached judges and candidates who are important to them,' said consultant Luis Carlos Ugalde, a former head of Mexico's electoral commission.
Rights group Defensorxs has identified around 20 candidates it considers 'high risk,' including Silvia Delgado, a former lawyer for Sinaloa Cartel co-founder Joaquin 'El Chapo' Guzman.
Another aspiring judge, in Durango state, spent almost six years in prison in the United States for drug crimes.
Voters were tasked with choosing around 880 federal judges – including Supreme Court justices – as well as hundreds of local judges and magistrates. Another election for the remainder will be held in 2027.
Candidates were supposed to have a law degree, experience in legal affairs and what is termed 'a good reputation,' as well as no criminal record.
To do a good job, voters 'would have to spend hours and hours researching the track record and the profiles of each of the hundreds of candidates,' said David Shirk, a professor at the University of San Diego.
He believes that most of the corruption in Mexico's judicial system is in law enforcement agencies and public prosecutor offices.
'If you can avoid being prosecuted, you don't have to worry about the judge,' said Shirk, who heads the Justice in Mexico research project.
The judicial reforms were championed by Sheinbaum's predecessor and mentor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who frequently clashed with the courts before stepping down last year.
The main reason for the elections seems to be 'because Lopez Obrador had a grudge against the judges,' Shirk said.
– Agence France-Presse
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
UC Scientist To Serve On United Nations Panel
Press Release – University of Canterbury Laura Revell, Associate Professor in Atmospheric Chemistry at Te Whare Wnanga o Waitaha | University of Canterbury (UC), is the only New Zealand representative on the independent Scientific Panel on the Effects of Nuclear War. A University of Canterbury academic has been appointed to a United Nations expert panel examining the physical effects and social impact of nuclear war. Laura Revell, Associate Professor in Atmospheric Chemistry at Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha | University of Canterbury (UC), is the only New Zealand representative on the independent Scientific Panel on the Effects of Nuclear War. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres announced the 21-member expert panel this week, saying it would examine the physical effects and societal consequences of a nuclear war on a local, regional and planetary scale in the days, weeks and decades following a nuclear war. The panel is tasked with publishing a comprehensive report, making key conclusions, and identifying areas requiring future research. Associate Professor Revell was nominated by the Royal Society Te Apārangi and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade for the panel because of her expertise in atmospheric chemistry, climate modelling, and recent research into the environmental consequences of a rapidly intensifying rocket launch industry. She is also a member of the UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, which assesses the effects of ozone depletion and UV radiation on life on Earth. 'Obviously we live in uncertain geopolitical times and it's unnerving that research into the consequences of nuclear war is relevant again, four decades since the United Nations last studied its effects,' she says. 'I'm honoured to serve on this panel which I believe will contribute to a greater understanding of the far-reaching consequences of this kind of event.' A report prepared by the scientific panel will be considered by the United Nations General Assembly in 2027.
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
UC Scientist To Serve On United Nations Panel
Press Release – University of Canterbury Laura Revell, Associate Professor in Atmospheric Chemistry at Te Whare Wnanga o Waitaha | University of Canterbury (UC), is the only New Zealand representative on the independent Scientific Panel on the Effects of Nuclear War. A University of Canterbury academic has been appointed to a United Nations expert panel examining the physical effects and social impact of nuclear war. Laura Revell, Associate Professor in Atmospheric Chemistry at Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha | University of Canterbury (UC), is the only New Zealand representative on the independent Scientific Panel on the Effects of Nuclear War. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres announced the 21-member expert panel this week, saying it would examine the physical effects and societal consequences of a nuclear war on a local, regional and planetary scale in the days, weeks and decades following a nuclear war. The panel is tasked with publishing a comprehensive report, making key conclusions, and identifying areas requiring future research. Associate Professor Revell was nominated by the Royal Society Te Apārangi and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade for the panel because of her expertise in atmospheric chemistry, climate modelling, and recent research into the environmental consequences of a rapidly intensifying rocket launch industry. She is also a member of the UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, which assesses the effects of ozone depletion and UV radiation on life on Earth. 'Obviously we live in uncertain geopolitical times and it's unnerving that research into the consequences of nuclear war is relevant again, four decades since the United Nations last studied its effects,' she says. 'I'm honoured to serve on this panel which I believe will contribute to a greater understanding of the far-reaching consequences of this kind of event.' A report prepared by the scientific panel will be considered by the United Nations General Assembly in 2027.
Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
On Why The Free Market Is A Scam, Plus The Epstein Saga
In the shadow of the Holocaust at the end of WWII, the world passed a raft of United Nations/Geneva conventions to ensure that states could 'never again' inflict such horrors on a racially defined population. Well, such horrors are happening again. Hundreds of thousands of innocent men, woman and children are being systematically butchered for the crime of being born Palestinian. Hunger has been weaponised, and mass starvation is being live-streamed into our homes. In the blackest of ironies, the perpetrator of these horrors is the state of Israel, the homeland of the people victimised by the Nazi regime. The world that rushed to give Israelis refugees a home – on someone else's land - 80 years ago seems barely able to summon a whimper of protest this time around. They're even bungling the whimper. Earlier this week, New Zealand signed up to a a joint letter – endorsed by 28 nations in all - calling on Israel to end its inhumane actions in Gaza, and to allow humanitarian aid to flow freely into the territory. Fine words, but without anything – eg the threat of economic sanctions if Israel fails to comply– to back them up. In a ham-fisted attempt at even-handedness, the letter also called on Hamas to 'immediately' and 'unconditionally' release the remaining hostages. By making that call, the signatories are ignoring the main reason why the ceasefire talks have bogged down. With reason, Hamas has held out for some commitment from Israel that if Hamas releases the remaining hostages Israel will not (a) immediately resume the genocide (b) build new Israeli settlements in Gaza that permanently displace Palestinians and finally, that Israel will (c) withdraw its troops to some agreed positions, to create a a breathing space in which a negotiated form of Palestinian self-governance in Gaza can take shape. Does New Zealand have any problem with any of those Hamas pre-conditions – and if so, why? By simply making a call for an 'immediate' and 'unconditional' release of the hostages, New Zealand is dodging all the key questions about Gaza's future. The only future prospect that we are mentioning is the 'two state solution' that ceased to be a feasible concept 25 years ago, and which the Israeli parliament explicitly rejected last year. In that sense, the Israelis are right. The letter that New Zealand signed is disconnected from reality. And the realities we are choosing to ignore concern the future governance of Gaza. Plainly, Israel cannot be trusted to decide that for itself. Free market follies At times, it is pretty hard to see what good the 'free' market is doing for most of us. The usual responses – we all benefit when global commodity prices are sky high and anyway, what can you do about it? – are inadequate. Wouldn't ordinary citizens be better off if local food distribution was severed from the dictates of global markets? Yes, it would involve some form of price control – either directly, or by breaking up the supermarket duopoly, in order to create genuine price competition at the retail level. Theoretically, it would require a brave government to demand that the local price of some food staples (eg butter, cheese) be set at roughly 80% of the overseas price, as discounted via a basket of cost estimates for overseas freight and distribution and all the other inputs that go into setting the current retail price of the same produce in say, London. No doubt, our lack of genuine competition at retail level is compounding this problem of 'global price capture.' Yet as things stand, we get screwed by the global commodity price, only to be screwed again at the supermarket checkout. The current situation seems to be neither free, nor fair. No doubt, any local price ratio would be imperfect, but so is the status quo. It costs as much here (or more) for stuff that's grown here, as it does after we have shipped the same produce across to the other side of the world. That's a sign of significant market failure. It calls for an intervention. Obviously, our farmers benefit from high global commodity prices. Good for them. But waiting for trickle down economics to dribble that good fortune on down (via farmers spending in the local economy) is wishful thinking. It takes a very long time, if ever, for spending in the retail economy by Canterbury farmers to arrive on the doorsteps of homes in south Auckland. People can die, waiting. In the meantime, the 'free' market is imposing these kind of cost increases on households: The price of a block of butter is now 120 percent higher than it was a decade ago, Stats NZ said. In the year to June it was up 46.5 percent to $8.60 for a 500g block. Despite the very high returns they are currently getting, our farmers do not seem to be spending up large in the wider retail economy. Instead, they're reportedly using their earnings to pay down debt, and to repair/replace/upscale their farm inputs. Forcing New Zealand consumers to pay as much, or more as people are paying in Britain for our produce is an outrage. By treating maximum gains from foreign markets as our top priority, we are putting essential food products beyond the reach of many New Zealand households. That makes no moral sense. Nor does the fact that the best of our produce is being sent overseas, while local consumers are being expected to pay steep prices for inferior, unripe examples of – for example – green kiwifruit, which used to be an affordable fruit staple. When politicians say that's just how the market works, they're speaking from a comfort zone that many of us can barely imagine. Footnote: Mainstream economic theory and practice takes for granted that consumers and workers should be treated as cannon fodder. Unemployment, reduced wages and reduced household spending are routinely touted as a good way of combating inflation. In reality, it creates stagflation, the malady that's keeping our economy stuck in recession, or perpetually on the brink of it. The policy focus is exclusively on the demand side of the economy. Unfortunately, both National and Labour seem averse to fighting inflation (and predatory pricing) by targeting the supply side of the economy. That would mean taking on the supermarkets and the banks. Fat chance. Those who profit from the status quo prefer to keep the 'free' market rigged in their favour. Epstein, Trump's BFF If you Google the words 'Trump, Epstein' and then hit ' Images' you will find any number of photographs of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein hanging out, chatting, yukking it up, attending weddings together and generally acting like the best of pals. Somehow though, the media is now being asked to prove that a relationship existed that is on the public record for all to see. The gang that regularly used to hang out with Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and a very large number of very young women included Trump, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and several prominent boardroom CEOs. Yet apparently, the same MAGA crowd who think that the Democrats ran a massive paedophile ring out of a NYC pizza parlour are suffering from cognitive dissonance when being asked to connect the dots between Epstein and Trump. Now it may be that Clinton and Trump dutifully respected their marriage vows while in Epstein's company. Maybe any and all lapses were with young women legally of an age to consent. But regularly hanging out with a known sex trafficker – and Trump is on the record as noting Epstein's sexual preferences ran to very young women – hardly gives Trump the moral high ground. Especially when Trump put so much political significance on the alleged links between the Democrats, the deep state and Epstein. It isn't what Trump did that is his current problem. By now, even the MAGA crowd must know that Trump is a corrupt degenerate. It is the cover-up that seems to be hurting him. The faithful are beginning to realise that Trump was lying to them before, and is lying to them now, about his links to Epstein. Gracious. What other untruths might their hero be telling? Mysterious r&b The New York musician known as Dawuna – birth name Ian Mugerwa – has carved out an interesting niche. He makes low fi soulful r&b that feels timeless, understated and yet naggingly catchy. He's like Prince on serious downers. Here's the new single ' Love Jaunt.' Dawuna is best known for his Glass Lit Dream album released toward the end of 2020. At the time, his music had seemed like a soulful Jai Paul meets Burial hybrid - and while that mix is about as good as it gets, the album reached only a small, fervent audience. Here's the 'Ape Prince' track:
