Mexico's LXVI Legislature Ushers in Era of Constitutional Reforms

As Mexico enters the final phase of its six-year presidential term, the newly inaugurated LXVI Legislature of the Chamber of Deputies is already making waves with a slate of ambitious constitutional reforms. These changes, particularly within the Judicial Branch, aim to transform the nation's judiciary by increasing transparency, enhancing citizen participation, and ensuring the independence of the judicial process. Set against a backdrop of political transitions and economic challenges, these reforms are poised to redefine Mexico's institutional landscape for years to come.

The reform to Mexico's judiciary introduces a groundbreaking shift toward public involvement. For the first time, citizens will directly elect key judicial figures, including ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN), magistrates from the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Power of the Federation (TEPJF), Circuit and District judges, and members of the newly established Judicial Disciplinary Court. This new policy is seen as a bold move to bridge the gap between Mexico’s citizens and its judiciary—a significant step in a country where public trust in governmental institutions has historically been tenuous.

Under the reformed system, members of the SCJN will no longer be appointed by a combination of executive and legislative powers. Instead, they will be chosen by the Mexican electorate, granting citizens a voice in judicial matters through regular elections held in conjunction with the country's federal elections. These changes are intended to bolster judicial accountability and are widely viewed as a response to long-standing concerns about transparency and impartiality within the judiciary.

This approach underscores the desire to make the judiciary more responsive to the Mexican people, providing a new level of scrutiny and legitimacy for judicial appointments. Although the logistics and implications of citizen-elected judges remain a topic of debate, proponents argue that this democratized process will strengthen the foundation of Mexico’s judicial system and restore public confidence.

In addition to the overhaul in judicial appointments, the SCJN itself will undergo structural changes. The Supreme Court, which currently has eleven members, will be trimmed down to nine. This reduction aligns with efforts to streamline the decision-making process within the nation’s highest court. Further emphasizing checks and balances, the reform mandates that the presidency of the Supreme Court will rotate every two years, determined by the number of votes each judge receives during the election cycle. This rotation prevents any one individual from wielding prolonged influence over the court’s decisions, fostering a dynamic that supporters believe will better reflect the changing will of the electorate.

While some critics question whether the reduction in Supreme Court seats might constrain the breadth of expertise available on the bench, reform advocates suggest that a smaller court, regularly refreshed by elections, will be more agile in addressing pressing judicial matters without being bogged down by bureaucratic inertia.

One of the more controversial and unprecedented components of the reform is the establishment of "faceless judges." In a country where violence and threats against judicial officials are a critical issue, particularly in cases involving organized crime, this measure aims to protect judges’ identities to ensure their safety. In cases of organized crime, faceless judges will conduct judicial proceedings with identity safeguards, shielding them from potential retaliatory actions by criminal organizations.

While this move may raise ethical questions surrounding transparency and accountability, legislators have deemed it a necessary step in Mexico’s battle against criminal organizations. Similar models have been adopted in countries like Colombia and Italy with varying degrees of success, and Mexican lawmakers are optimistic about the potential for a parallel system to provide both security for judges and justice for citizens. However, experts caution that implementing such a policy requires stringent oversight to prevent abuse and ensure it remains focused on high-stakes, organized crime cases.

In a bid to increase accountability within the judiciary, the reform introduces a Judicial Disciplinary Court, which will operate with autonomy and technical independence. Made up of five members also elected by popular vote, the court is designed to address judicial misconduct and ensure adherence to the ethical standards expected of judicial officials. Until now, the Federal Judicial Council has managed judicial oversight and discipline, but the establishment of a dedicated disciplinary body is intended to enhance oversight and provide a clearer, more focused platform for addressing internal issues.

This court will handle cases of corruption, ethical violations, and disciplinary matters, aiming to maintain high standards within the judiciary. Its establishment reflects an effort to address concerns about corruption and maintain the judiciary’s integrity—an issue that has plagued the Mexican judicial system for years.

Despite the ambitious blueprint laid out by the reform, much of its practical application remains unclear. The secondary legislation required to implement these changes is yet to be defined. This secondary legislation will be pivotal in establishing the framework for citizen elections, the practicalities of rotating leadership within the SCJN, the protection of faceless judges, and the procedural guidelines governing the Judicial Disciplinary Court. Lawmakers are expected to face considerable challenges as they tackle these details, which will be critical to translating the reform's vision into reality.

Opposition members have called for a rigorous and transparent process in drafting this legislation, emphasizing the importance of checks and balances. Given the historical challenges within Mexico's judicial system, many believe that well-crafted secondary legislation will be essential to ensure that these reforms bring meaningful change rather than becoming merely symbolic.

Military-Led Public Security

Mexico's legislature has undertaken a historic realignment of the country’s public security structure, ushering in reforms that transfer control of the National Guard to the Secretariat of National Defense (Sedena). This move, aimed at strengthening national security through a unified military-police force, is poised to shift the balance of civil-military relations in Mexico and redefine public security strategy for the coming years. By positioning the National Guard under military command, the government is looking to harness military discipline and capacity while attempting to retain the National Guard’s public safety mission.

The transformation of the National Guard, established in 2019 as a federal public security institution, marks a decisive pivot towards a military-led approach to domestic security. Now formally under the direction of Sedena, the National Guard will operate as a permanent force staffed with military personnel trained in police protocols. This dual-focus training is designed to leverage the military’s organizational discipline and operational strength while instilling policing techniques necessary for civilian engagement.

A core mandate of the National Guard will be executing the National Public Security Strategy, aligning closely with Sedena’s established authority in national defense. This new setup reflects the government’s confidence in Sedena’s leadership to confront organized crime and endemic violence, an issue that has plagued Mexico for decades and has, in many regions, overwhelmed local and federal law enforcement.

The integration raises critical questions about the long-term implications for civil-military relations, transparency, and accountability in Mexico’s public security efforts. Civil liberties groups are voicing concerns about the extent to which the Guard's mission will retain its civilian ethos under military oversight. Advocates of the reform, however, argue that the military's logistical expertise and superior resources are indispensable in stabilizing regions overrun by criminal organizations.

The reformed National Guard will now play an integral role in criminal investigations, sharing investigative authority with the Public Prosecutor's Office and various police forces. This expansion of responsibilities aims to bridge gaps between crime prevention and prosecution, enhancing investigative cooperation across Mexico’s security institutions.

Under the new legislation, the National Guard is expected to provide investigative support to federal and state authorities, including the pursuit and apprehension of criminal suspects, forensic support, and evidence collection. The idea is that a coordinated approach between military-trained personnel and prosecutorial teams will lead to more efficient, high-impact outcomes in criminal cases, many of which involve complex networks of organized crime.

However, critics point out that mixing military protocols with civilian investigative procedures may present operational challenges, as military and policing entities traditionally operate with different mandates and philosophies. Additionally, civil liberties groups caution that the National Guard’s expanded investigatory role could blur the line between military action and policing, which could have implications for privacy rights and due process.

Another essential element of the reform grants Congress the authority to issue secondary legislation that will clarify the specific parameters governing military involvement in public security operations. These laws are expected to outline when and how the Army, Navy, and Air Force may be deployed domestically to support internal security, specifying limits to prevent overreach and ensure constitutional alignment.

The decision to formalize Congress’s role in setting operational boundaries is partly a response to public concerns over the increasing role of the military in civilian matters. Lawmakers are anticipated to prioritize public accountability, likely mandating reporting mechanisms and oversight protocols to monitor Sedena’s influence over the National Guard. This will be a delicate balancing act for Congress, as it attempts to maintain Sedena’s operational freedom to address security threats effectively while also establishing clear checks to prevent potential abuse of authority.

Congress will also have to define the National Guard's boundaries in civilian policing, a task that will involve complex considerations about the intersection of military and civilian jurisdictions. These regulations are expected to be the cornerstone of the framework that ensures military involvement remains strictly within its prescribed limits, supporting—not overshadowing—the country's civil institutions.

Integral to the reform is an amendment to Article 129 of the Mexican Constitution, which now delineates military authority during peacetime. The amended article underscores that military authority shall only exercise functions explicitly sanctioned by the Constitution and laws derived from it, reinforcing that, even with this expanded role, the National Guard's actions remain within constitutionally defined boundaries.

In times of peace, no military authority is to extend its functions beyond what is legislatively prescribed, a provision aimed at preserving the distinction between military duties and civilian responsibilities. The inclusion of this language is an attempt to reassure the public that, despite the expanded military presence in public security, Mexico’s constitutional principles remain intact. Critics, however, note that the effectiveness of this clause will ultimately hinge on rigorous enforcement and transparency in the National Guard’s day-to-day operations.

The reforms also reaffirm the Federal Executive’s authority to deploy the Army, Navy, and Air Force in support of public security tasks. This power is not new, as Mexican presidents have frequently mobilized the military to address domestic security threats, particularly in regions where organized crime syndicates wield considerable influence.

The reform formalizes this practice under legislative guidelines, with the intent of creating a more cohesive, disciplined approach to deploying military assets in situations requiring federal intervention. This provision is viewed as a mechanism to consolidate executive command over the armed forces while retaining legislative input. The executive authority to call on the armed forces is limited to specific public security operations and must align with legal parameters established by Congress.

This structure could offer a more efficient framework for deploying security resources to regions in crisis. However, it also concentrates significant authority within the executive branch, prompting ongoing debates about checks and balances within Mexico's security landscape.

As the National Guard transitions into Sedena’s orbit, Mexico is entering a pivotal period of experimentation with military-led public security. The government asserts that integrating the National Guard with Sedena is a strategic response to escalating security concerns and has positioned this reform as a cornerstone of the country’s broader security strategy. The real test, however, will be in its execution: how seamlessly military discipline and operational capability can coexist with the mandate to serve and protect citizens.

The reform has drawn mixed reactions domestically and abroad, with some viewing it as a necessary step to strengthen public security, while others fear that militarization might curtail civil liberties. Critics argue that Mexico’s security challenges are deeply rooted in socioeconomic factors that a militarized response alone cannot resolve. In their view, addressing the root causes of crime, such as poverty, inequality, and inadequate local law enforcement, should be prioritized over military expansion.

Supporters of the reform, however, see it as an opportunity to confront the immediate crisis posed by organized crime and insecurity, arguing that Mexico’s current public security apparatus lacks the capacity to tackle the nation’s security challenges independently.

Changes to Benefit Indigenous Communities, Workers, and Youth

The government has introduced a series of constitutional reforms that signal a shift toward inclusivity, economic equity, and social welfare. Focused on recognizing indigenous and Afro-Mexican rights, ensuring wage stability, and elevating social support for unemployed youth, these reforms underscore Mexico's ambitions to create a more equitable society. These initiatives, while championed for their progressive vision, present challenges that will test the government's resolve to address structural inequalities in the years ahead.

The reform of Article 2 of the Mexican Constitution redefines the relationship between the state and its indigenous and Afro-Mexican populations, recognizing them as “subjects of public law.” This new designation grants these communities direct access to budgetary resources, empowering them to develop autonomously and participate in national decision-making processes, particularly those that affect their territories and ways of life.

For decades, Mexico’s indigenous and Afro-Mexican populations have sought both legal recognition and economic autonomy. These communities, rich in cultural heritage but often overlooked by traditional policies, have faced socio-economic barriers exacerbated by limited political representation. By categorizing indigenous and Afro-Mexican peoples as subjects of public law, the reform not only acknowledges their legal status but positions them to influence local and national policies that directly affect their communities.

At the heart of the reform is a provision mandating the right to “prior, free, informed, culturally appropriate, and good-faith consultation” for these communities when any legislative or administrative decisions could significantly impact their lives. This consultation requirement sets a high bar for transparency and respect, aiming to protect the assets, values, and identities of these communities. This is particularly relevant for areas rich in natural resources, where infrastructure or mining projects could have lasting ecological and social consequences.

Critics, however, question the practical enforceability of these consultations. While the reform enshrines these rights, the government’s ability to enforce and monitor compliance remains to be tested. Local governments, often pressured by powerful economic interests, will need to balance developmental goals with respect for indigenous and Afro-Mexican territories—a delicate task that will likely face scrutiny from both advocates and critics of the reform.

In a move seen as vital for worker welfare, the LXVI Legislature has also amended Article 123 of the Constitution to ensure that minimum wage increases cannot fall below the rate of inflation. By codifying inflation-proof minimum wage adjustments, the government aims to protect the real value of wages for Mexico’s lowest-paid workers.

For years, Mexico’s minimum wage has lagged behind inflation, diminishing the purchasing power of millions of workers and pushing many to the economic margins. This constitutional guarantee, hailed as a “dignification” of the minimum wage, seeks to reverse that trend by shielding wages from the corrosive effects of inflation, providing a measure of economic stability for the country’s most vulnerable workers.

The reform extends beyond general minimum wage protections, ensuring inflation-adjusted wage stability for full-time professionals in education, healthcare, law enforcement, and military services. This includes teachers, doctors, nurses, administrative health staff, police officers, soldiers, marines, and members of the National Guard. By broadening protections to encompass these essential workers, the reform acknowledges the challenges faced by those who deliver critical public services, a sector that often endures wage stagnation despite the vital nature of their work.

This inflation-adjusted wage policy, however, poses potential challenges for small businesses, especially in Mexico’s informal sector, which comprises a significant portion of the economy. Employers in this sector may struggle to keep up with mandatory wage increases, potentially prompting inflationary pressures of their own as businesses pass rising labor costs onto consumers. Proponents argue that increased wages will drive economic growth by boosting purchasing power, yet the government will need to tread carefully to mitigate inflationary feedback loops that could dilute the reform’s intended impact.

In a step to address youth unemployment, the Mexican government has elevated its flagship program, “Youth Building the Future,” to constitutional status. This initiative provides a monthly stipend—equivalent to at least the current minimum wage—to young people aged 18 to 29 who are neither employed nor studying. For a period of 12 months, program participants receive on-the-job training, with the aim of preparing them to enter the workforce and contribute to the economy.

By enshrining this program in the Constitution, the government signals its commitment to investing in the next generation, particularly those who face barriers to education and employment. With youth unemployment rates disproportionately high, especially in rural and marginalized areas, “Youth Building the Future” aims to alleviate some of the economic pressures that have historically hindered youth advancement.

The program is also designed to address one of Mexico’s pressing social issues: the “nini” phenomenon—a term used to describe young people who are “ni estudia ni trabaja” (neither studying nor working). This demographic, often caught between limited educational opportunities and a challenging job market, has struggled with underemployment and low wages. By offering job training alongside financial support, the government aims to break the cycle of poverty and dependence, helping youth transition into sustainable employment.

However, critics question whether the program’s short-term benefits translate to long-term employability. While participants receive stipends and training, concerns remain about the program’s capacity to guarantee stable jobs upon completion. Skeptics argue that without a robust job market and adequate support for small and medium enterprises, the transition from training to employment could be rocky. The government will need to ensure that the program’s objectives align with economic realities, fostering partnerships with businesses to create job opportunities that capitalize on participants’ new skills.

These constitutional reforms collectively paint a picture of a legislature intent on fostering inclusivity, economic security, and opportunity. Each reform, while ambitious in its vision, faces substantial hurdles in execution. The effectiveness of these policies will largely depend on secondary legislation and implementation frameworks that enable local governments, businesses, and civil society to work collaboratively with federal initiatives.

Critics caution that without adequate funding and clear guidelines, the rights promised in these reforms could falter in practice. Furthermore, the constitutional elevation of social programs like “Youth Building the Future” raises questions about fiscal sustainability. As Mexico commits to long-term social support, some analysts question whether the government can maintain these programs without incurring unsustainable public debt or reallocating resources from other vital areas, such as infrastructure and healthcare.

Supporters, however, argue that these reforms represent a critical investment in Mexico’s human capital. The wage protections and social programs address long-standing inequalities and aim to create an economic environment where indigenous, Afro-Mexican, and low-income communities can thrive alongside wealthier regions. By lifting wages in line with inflation and supporting youth employment, the government aspires to build a more resilient workforce and a society with fewer economic disparities.

In-text Citation: (Mondragón, 2024, pp. 30-32)