CDMX.- The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) analyzed this Tuesday, in private and for three hours, the draft opinion for the reform of the Judicial Branch prepared by Morena, but did not reach a consensus or position.
“During the private session held by the Plenum, various points of view were raised by the Ministers who are members of this High Court. It was decided that the analysis of the reform of the Federal Judicial Branch will continue,” the Court reported in a two-paragraph statement.
Judicial sources indicated that the discussion will not necessarily continue on Thursday, when the next public session of the Plenary is scheduled. Justice Luis María Aguilar, dean of the SCJN, did not attend the session on Tuesday.
What can the SCJN do about the reform of the PJ?
The House of Representatives’ Constitutional Affairs Committee will vote on the bill on Monday, August 26, while the new deputies and senators who take office on September 1 will be responsible for discussing and, if necessary, approving the reform.
In reality, the Court does not have the authority to take any concrete action or resolution on a ruling by Congress; the most the court could do is send suggestions or observations on possible errors, gaps or contradictions in the ruling, as well as warnings about possible violations of international standards on judicial independence and separation of powers. In the case of Congress, it would not be obliged to take into account the comments of the SCJN, and if the reform is approved, the Court will not be able to do anything to reverse it, since it is a change to the Magna Carta, which does not admit judicial challenge. Historically, some Ministers have considered that the Judicial Branch can review, in amparo trials, whether the procedures for reforming the Constitution conformed to the requirements that it itself provides, but that position has always been a minority one, and everyone agrees that the content of the reforms is not reviewable.
Would you propose that ministers resign?
Several points of the ruling have raised doubts, for example, the one that offers current Ministers the option of resigning in order to be entitled to their retirement pay, provided that they remain in office until August 31, 2025, so that the Court can continue to function while the judicial election is organized.
From the wording of the transitional articles, it is understood that the resignation would have to be submitted within thirty days of the reform being published, that is, probably at the end of October.
#SCJN #discusses #reform #position #pending
