On Oct. 1, Mexico swore in a new president, and she is a presidenta — a woman. Mexicans can take pride in the fact that our country, which popularized the term “machismo” (for bad reasons), has elected its first female leader. In this regard, we have moved ahead of our neighbor and partner, the United States.
Unfortunately, our pride must be tempered. Claudia Sheinbaum won the June elections to lead a democratic country, something Mexico has only truly been for nearly 30 years. However, as president, she appears committed to following her predecessor’s aim of reverting Mexico to a one-party autocracy, reminiscent of much of the 20th century, when competitive and fair elections were lacking and the judiciary was not independent.
During that period, Congress and the judiciary were subservient to the president. Reforms enacted from 1994 to 1996, which I promoted, ended these anomalies, enabling Mexico to become a multiparty democracy with regular power alternation and an independent judiciary that has, on many occasions, upheld constitutional principles against reckless moves by other branches of government.
In the final month of a presidency characterized by demagoguery, clientelism, incompetence and the abuse of power, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, often called AMLO, decided to dismantle the independent judiciary and the institutions responsible for organizing fair elections. By using an unconstitutional interpretation of the electoral rules for representation to boost his party’s numbers in the lower house and appearing to buy the vote of a senator by promising him and his family impunity for serious crimes, AMLO’s party, Morena, obtained the two-thirds majority necessary to pass constitutional amendments in Congress. The subsequent approval process in state legislatures was completed in just a few days.
As a result of these changes, all judges, magistrates, and Supreme Court justices will purportedly be replaced by individuals who lack significant professional qualifications and owe their positions to the ruling party — or even worse, to other patrons and potentially criminal organizations. By design, the new judges will be neither independent nor competent.
The replacement of the judiciary is being framed as a democratic process, with judges to be elected by popular vote from lists of candidates. This argument is preposterous, as the lists will effectively be determined by the ruling party.
Additionally, it is widely accepted that electing judges by popular vote undermines judicial impartiality, independence and integrity — cornerstones of a fair and just legal system. Even in the United States, where this occurs at the state and local levels but never at the federal level or in all states, it has been criticized by legal scholars. Morena legislators relied on questionable U.S. precedent to justify their actions.
AMLO’s changes also aim to eliminate the autonomy of the country’s electoral institutions, subsuming them under the executive branch. This means that, as in Mexico’s semiauthoritarian past, the ruling party will manage elections and resolve disputes arising from them, with predictable outcomes.
Similarly, formerly independent institutions responsible for enforcing competition laws; ensuring access to information; and protecting data and telecommunications; and regulating he energy production will also be brought under the authority of the executive branch. This shift would put an end to mechanisms designed to prevent the corrupt and abusive use of government power and facilitate the country’s economic growth.
The constitution has also been amended to grant the armed forces control over the national police and the authority to engage in nonmilitary activities, including infrastructure projects and management of state-owned enterprises. This development suggests that the military may become a stakeholder in sustaining an authoritarian and corrupt system. (Think Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua.)
The intended judicial overhaul has been legally challenged. Numerous judges have ordered its suspension, citing violations of basic constitutional principles. The controversy has reached the Supreme Court, which has been asked to review the constitutionality of the amendments.
Morena partisans have argued that the Supreme Court should not have a say in what they claim is already part of the constitution, even when these changes were made through dubious means. Their arguments are self-refuting: One of the court’s core missions is to verify the constitutionality of actions by other branches of government — a key purpose of the 1994 judicial reform.
Furthermore, many distinguished constitutional scholars have argued that the Supreme Court has the authority to rule on any changes passed single-handedly by a ruling party. The reasoning is straightforward: A ruling party may seek to change completely Mexico’s political system — democracy, as specified in the constitution. And this is exactly what Morena would achieve by eliminating the division of powers.
On Monday, the Supreme Court published a draft opinion reaffirming its prerogative to scrutinize the constitutionality of the intended judicial reforms and indicated that parts of it should be invalidated. In response, Morena legislators on Wednesday pushed a bill through the lower house that aims to strip the court of its authority to review constitutional amendments passed by Congress.
This latest move has fully unmasked Morena: Its intent is to transform Mexico’s political regime into an authoritarian one.
Regrettably, Sheinbaum has doubled down on her support for AMLO’s antidemocratic scheme, even emulating his tactics of slandering, insulting and threatening both the judiciary as an institution and individual judges as well as others who have criticized the amendments. She is also advocating that the government ignore court rulings.
The constitutional crisis she is fueling will not deliver the good and democratic governance she was elected to provide. She should instead use her mandate to halt the democratic regression orchestrated by AMLO — whatever his ultimate motive — and initiate a genuine and comprehensive process of reform to achieve true rule of law and citizens’ security in Mexico.
She could then improve enormously upon her predecessor’s poor performance. She must decide between honoring her loyalty to AMLO or to the Mexican people’s will to live in democracy.
Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León was president of Mexico from 1994 to 2000.