In brief
The election, part of a broader judicial overhaul, is met with skepticism as only 12.6% to 13.3% of eligible voters participated, sparking concerns over electoral legitimacy.
In a significant moment for Mexico's judicial reform, the recent nationwide election to appoint thousands of judges faced a dismal turnout, with up to 90% of eligible voters opting to stay away from polling stations. The national electoral authority reported that only between 12.6% and 13.3% of voters cast their ballots, underscoring one of the lowest levels of engagement in federal elections since the country embraced democratic practices in the early 2000s.This stark abstention rate raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the election aimed at transitioning the judicial system from an appointment-based framework to one where judges are chosen directly by the public. Proponents argue that this change enhances democracy, while critics denounce it as an attempt by the leftist Morena party to consolidate control over the judiciary.Among those who did vote, confusion prevailed due to the overwhelming number of candidates competing for approximately 2,700 judgeships, including those for the Supreme Court and numerous federal and state tribunals. Observers noted instances of voters utilizing cheat sheets distributed by Morena, and reports of irregularities included voters gathering in booths, taking photographs of their ballots, and potential vote-buying practices.Experts like Laurence Pantin from Juicio Justo, a nonprofit advocating for justice access in Mexico, criticized the overall structure of the election, denouncing it as undemocratic and suggesting manipulation efforts were afoot. The low turnout and irregularities suggest a need for reevaluation of the electoral process, as many citizens feel disconnected from the changes being imposed on their judiciary.
