Mexico made history on Sunday by holding the world’s first popular elections for judges and magistrates—a controversial move supporters say will combat corruption but critics warn could politicize the judiciary in a country already grappling with organized crime and weak institutions.
President Claudia Sheinbaum hailed the vote as a democratic triumph, despite a meager 13% turnout and widespread confusion among voters. "Mexico is the most democratic country in the world," she declared, dismissing accusations of authoritarianism.
The election, a flagship policy of Sheinbaum and her predecessor Andrés Manuel López Obrador, sought to fill roughly 880 federal judicial posts—including Supreme Court justices—alongside hundreds of local judges. A second round is scheduled for 2027.
Yet the process was marred by logistical challenges. Voters faced a daunting array of largely unknown candidates—some 7,700 contenders for over 2,600 positions—with little information available. Campaigning was restricted, and party affiliations were obscured, leaving many citizens unprepared.
Beyond low participation, analysts and rights groups raised alarms that the elections could enable criminal organizations to infiltrate the judiciary. While corruption already plagues Mexico’s courts, experts fear popular voting may make it easier for cartels to install sympathetic judges.
Rights group Defensorxs flagged around 20 "high-risk" candidates, including Silvia Delgado, a former lawyer for Sinaloa Cartel co-founder Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. Another candidate in Durango had served nearly six years in a U.S. prison for drug trafficking.
Margaret Satterthwaite, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on judicial independence, warned that while corruption exists in appointed systems, elections could be "more easily infiltrated by organized crime."
Opponents of the reform, including protesters who marched in Mexico City, argued the vote erodes judicial independence—the last check on executive power.
Sheinbaum, however, dismissed such claims, framing the election as a blow to a "regime of corruption and privileges." López Obrador, who voted in Chiapas, called it a historic step: "Never in our country’s history have the people had the right to elect judges."
Many voters expressed disillusionment, citing decades of systemic corruption. Some admitted feeling pressured to participate, while others struggled to make informed choices.
"The influence of criminal groups already exists," noted Martha Tamayo, a lawyer and former lawmaker from Sinaloa. "The cartels bribe judges whether they’re elected or not."
Results are expected in the coming days. But with skepticism lingering over the election’s legitimacy and fears of deepening politicization, Mexico’s judicial experiment enters uncharted territory.
As Laurence Patin of legal group Juicio Justo put it: "It’s an effort to control the court system. But in a healthy democracy, you need counterbalances."