27 may 2025

Hacia un experimento "kafkiano"


Una nota de la periodista Christine Murray, en el periódico británico Financial Times, afirma que México vivirá un "experimento kafkiano" el próximo 1 de junio para elegir a 900 jueces a nivel federal y a cientos más en 19 jurisdicciones estatales en un proceso de votación nunca antes probado en otros lugares, que se implementó en tan solo ocho meses.
Advierten especialistas que amenaza la independencia judicial, echa por la borda 30 años de conocimiento y abre la puerta al crimen organizado.
A través de testimonios, el diario destacó que los inversionistas temen que una reforma radical imposibilite ganar cualquier caso contra el Gobierno.
Pero nuestra Presidenta  Claudia Sheinbaum cree que con la elección se reducirá la corrupción y aumentará la rendición de cuentas de los jueces.
Mmm.
Reaccióno hoy bote pronto en mañanera, dijo"Salió un artículo en uno de los periódicos de fuera de que era un experimento 'kaftkiano', es decisión del pueblo de México elegir", dijo.
Pero no entró a fondo del tema crítico del FT…
Como sabemos Franz Kafka (1883-1924), fue un gran escritor, de los más influyentes d ela litarurura universal, pionero en sus novelas de la fusión de elementos realistas con fantásticos ..
Lo que dijo el Financial pegó., en efecto, estamos ante una elección kafkiana..
¿Qué significa serlo?.
.Se refiere a situación absurda o carencia de lógica, que recuerda a la atmósfera de las novelas de Kafka "El proceso, El castillo y América, además La metamorfosis, en donde pasa algo ilógico, surreal y que tiene un componente escalofriante…
Además, de kafkiana la elección judicial será la mayor simulación democrática de nuestros tiempos.
Y el INE reconoce que hay trapacerías como los llamados acordeones y ha dicho su presidenta que pudiera haber un boicot?.
¿¡Y que podemos hacer los ciudadanos?. 
Algunos van marchar, protestar y otros llamamos a no votar, no tiene caso participar en la farsa, en el circo…
La autoridad espera una baja participación pero con uno que vote lo legaliza…
Además, nuestra SCJN abdicó de su función de pronunciarse sobre su constitucionalidad y validez.
Me pregunto el ¿por qué la SCJN no hizo nada…
¡Para la historia inmediata!
##
Mexico embarks on ‘Kafkaesque’ experiment to elect judges
Christine Murray in Mexico City
Financial Times, 26 de mayo
Mexicans are preparing to elect the country’s judges by popular vote, in a unique experiment that legal groups warn threatens judicial independence, throws out 30 years of knowledge and opens the door to organised crime.
In elections on June 1, Mexico will replace almost 900 judges at the federal level and hundreds more across 19 state-level jurisdictions in a voting process never tried elsewhere that was implemented in just eight months.

Previously, prospective judges worked for many years inside the system and took competitive exams, but they now need just five years of legal experience and a law degree.

The new system was championed by former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a leftist populist who lambasted judges that blocked his favoured legislation.

His chosen successor President Claudia Sheinbaum has supported the vote, arguing it will cut corruption and make judges more accountable.

Legal experts at home and abroad have panned the idea, as have investors and former officials from Mexico’s independent institutions.

“The most serious consequence of this election is you will subsume, absorb, capture, domesticate, control the judiciary,” said Luis Carlos Ugalde, former head of the Federal Electoral Institute. “In practice, political and judicial controls on the government will be almost completely eroded.”

Many Mexican lawyers consider it the death of a flawed, but improving, judiciary they spent 30 years building alongside the country’s transition to democracy.

The Mexican Bar Association’s Luis Pereda and Adriana García of Stanford University’s Rule of Law Impact Lab wrote this month that “this is a dysfunctional mechanism pushed by the governing party and its allies that threw 30 years of gradual improvements in the judiciary in the bin”.

“It's the ideal scenario for the infiltration of criminal interests,” they added.

A random lottery decided which half of federal judges would be replaced on Sunday, and which in 2027. Most candidates for the vote were chosen by the ruling party and were not allowed any public or private funding.

Some are openly associated with the ruling Morena party. One candidate for the supreme court has styled herself “Amlo’s lawyer”, referring to former president López Obrador.

Party loyalists including López Obrador’s son have posted their preferred choices online, while others are promoting “cheat sheets” they want voters to bring to help fill out the complex ballot papers.

The electoral institute expects turnout of about 8 to 15 per cent, compared with more than 60 per cent in last year’s presidential election. Most Mexicans are simply uninterested, political analysts said, while some opposition voters will boycott the process.

“Less than 1 per cent understand what they are voting for,” Jorge Sepúlveda, vice-president of the Mexican Bar Association. “Those that’ll vote will mostly be people propelled by the government.”

He said many of his colleagues agreed reform was needed, but not in this form. “I don’t know a single one who thinks this was a good idea.”

In Mexico City, voters must fill out nine ballots, choosing about 50 names from a choice of almost 300. Specialist judges were assigned to certain districts, meaning voters in parts of the capital will choose all the country’s competition and telecoms judges.

Some candidates are unopposed and can be elected with just one vote. “Kafkaesque doesn’t even come close,” said Carlos Ramírez of political risk consultancy Integralia.

At a time of high uncertainty for Mexico, with US President Donald Trump imposing tariffs and threatening military action against drug cartels, the judicial reform is seen by businesses as an additional deterrent to investment.

“No one will be able to win cases against the government,” said an executive at a foreign company in Mexico, who asked not to be named. “The government will always win, even in tax and competition disputes . . . The only check and balance will be Trump.”

The country’s banking lobby is seeking to set up specialised courts with a select group of the elected judges.

Trump’s administration is yet to give a view, but secretary of state Marco Rubio was among US senators who signed a letter last year arguing that “the proposed judicial reforms in Mexico would undermine the independence and transparency of the country’s judiciary, jeopardising critical economic and security interests shared by our two nations”.

An all-powerful disciplinary tribunal will be able to remove judges. Of 38 candidates for that, at least 10 have ties to the ruling party, including two who worked directly for López Obrador.

Ongoing divisions in the ruling party could be reflected in the results, with each camp influencing its own set of judges, said Ugalde.
 




No hay comentarios.:

El inquietante silencio de la opinión pública israelí

 El inquietante silencio de la opinión pública israelí/  Sami Naïr es politólogo, especialista en geopolítica y migraciones. Autor de varios...