Ciudad Juarez.- Employees of the Federal Judicial Branch (PJF) once again demonstrated against the constitutional reform that the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Deputies plans to discuss next Monday.
The workers wore white t-shirts with the slogan “The PJF works to defend your rights. Today it is our turn to defend ourselves in order to defend them.” “The day the judges are afraid, no one will be able to sleep peacefully,” “We are not the opposition, we serve the nation,” “For impartial justice, no to judicial reform,” were the messages printed on the banners placed at the entrance of the building located on Tecnológico Avenue.
Several drivers honked their horns in support of the protesters who, they say, are defending the country’s future.
“We know the risks of doing things differently with judicial reform, which is something that can seriously affect the balance of powers. One of the very important functions of the Judiciary is to be a counterweight, a balance, and being a counterweight does not mean being an opposition or an obstacle,” said David Aranda González, magistrate of the First Collegiate Court of the 17th Circuit based in Ciudad Juárez.
“It is simply a matter of legally regulating, through human rights, the fundamental rights to defend people from the actions of other authorities, to ensure that there are no abusive acts, that there are no arbitrary acts, that they do not go against the Constitution. That is why it is considered very, very, very risky that the judges could, in a certain way, be controlled by political interests, because the interests of the citizens would no longer be important,” the magistrate stated.
The civil organization Mexicans Against Corruption (MCC) presented the analysis of the opinion of the Constitutional Points Commission on the Constitutional Reform of the Judicial Branch. In its summary, it states that it makes significant changes to the initiative for constitutional reform to the Judicial Branch sent by the Federal Executive, related to the extraordinary election, since, unlike the initiative, the opinion does not contemplate the renewal of all federal judges, but exclusively of ministers, some electoral magistrates and half of the positions of circuit magistrates and district judges.
It lists important changes in the articles that regulate the eligibility requirements for the different positions and the procedures for the election of ministers, magistrates and judges.
As well as some changes in the articles that regulate the means of constitutional control: actions of unconstitutionality, amparo trials and constitutional controversies, particularly regarding the vote required to approve them.
The articles with significant changes are: 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 105, 107, 116, 122, second transitional, third transitional, fourth transitional, fifth transitional, sixth transitional, seventh transitional, eighth transitional and tenth transitional.
In addition, it mentions that the opinion contemplates the reform of articles not provided for in the initiative: 76, 89 and 113.
“In the analysis ‘The risks of the constitutional reform of the Judicial Branch of the Federation’ we warned of the risks for federal criminal proceedings due to the sudden replacement of judges. Despite this, the ruling does not correct or mitigate the risks, since it does not provide special measures for the members of the criminal trial courts, especially for the trial courts,” MCC stated.
For Judge Aranda González, this choice of judges may lead to the existence of too much proximity between some powers and others, which has been the trend since the theory of the separation of powers was implemented.
#Reform #puts #justice #risk