Mexico will hold historic judicial elections on Sunday. Some believe it will hurt democracy

Mexico is scheduled to hold its first-ever judicial elections on Sunday, with hundreds of judges, magistrates and justices on the ballot across the country. It’s an unprecedented contest that supporters say will democratize the courts, but critics fear it could make them more susceptible to the influence of politicians or criminal groups. Almost 900 federal positions will be in play, including all nine seats of the Supreme Court, as well as some 1,800 local positions in 19 states. Sunday’s event will be the first of two voting phases, with the second one set for 2027. The vote is the result of a constitutional reform that was approved last year during the final weeks of Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s presidency. He had argued that the change was necessary to stem impunity in the courts and give voters a greater say in the judicial process. But opponents saw the move as an attempt by López Obrador to strengthen the power of his ruling Morena party by overhauling the very judiciary that often blocked some of his policy proposals. Critics also worry that by having judges elected through popular vote, the independent authority of the courts could be compromised, and with it, their ability to uphold the law and keep other powers in check at a time of rampant crime and corruption. How the new system works Before the reform was enacted, Supreme Court judges were nominated by the president and approved in the Senate, while federal judges were selected by a judicial commission using exams and coursework that evaluated candidates on a meritocratic basis. In the new system, federal candidates will be elected by the public after being vetted and nominated by Evaluation Committees of the three branches of government. Unlike other elections, those running for a judicial post can’t be nominated or supported by any political party, according to Mexico’s electoral authority. They also can’t receive public or private funding, meaning they must finance their campaign on their own – a rule that reform supporters say reduces the likelihood of being influenced by political actors, but critics say favors wealthier candidates. Candidates are also prohibited from buying campaign ads on TV or radio, but they can promote themselves on social media or through interviews and other forums. Once in office, elected judges will be evaluated by a newly established Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal, which will have the power to investigate and sanction judicial personnel, except for Supreme Court justices and electoral magistrates. Some of those sanctions include suspensions, financial penalties, dismissals and disqualifications. Concerns of political capture Although the rules prohibit political parties from providing direct support to a candidate, critics warn that they could still influence the race by encouraging voters to elect people aligned with their interests. Local media have reported that some politicians and their supporters have been accused of distributing pamphlets, or cheat sheets, which provide suggestions on who to vote for. Just days ahead of the election, the National Electoral Institute (INE) – which is organizing the vote – said it was investigating two complaints related to the use of such pamphlets. “The law is very clear about who cannot intervene in this – neither governments of any level nor political parties,” INE adviser Claudia Zavala said in an interview with Milenio TV. CNN has reached out to Zavala for more information. Another concern is that political parties could theoretically have a say in which candidates are nominated in the first place. If a single party holds sway over the three branches of government, which oversee the candidates’ nomination process, that party could influence who gets on the ballot. “Right now, numerically, who holds the most influence over these branches of government – executive and legislative, specifically – would be the Morena party,” said Stephanie Brewer, director for Mexico at the Washington Office on Latin America. There’s similar apprehension about the new Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal that’s meant to supervise judges in office. Brewer says that if political actors manage to influence it, they could subsequently exert pressure on the judges it oversees. Impact of criminal groups One of the biggest concerns rights groups are warning about is that elections could also be influenced by criminal groups. In previous races, Mexican cartels have used violence to impact the outcome of a vote – often by attacking or assassinating candidates they oppose. Last year, the country saw a record number of victims from political-criminal violence, with Data Cívica, a human rights organization, reporting 661 attacks on people and facilities. Many of the victims either held or were running for municipal-level positions. This year, the think tank México Evalúa warned that eight states have a high risk of political-criminal violence in the upcoming judicial elections, saying that it is “highly likely that, through violence, organized crime will seek to seize judicial powers, especially at the local level.” Several political attacks have been recorded in the lead-up to the elections, though most of them involved candidates in mayoral races. Miguel Meza of the rights groups Defensorxs says he has not yet seen any attacks against judicial candidates, but that other risks remain. “Cartels (could) identify possible winners and offer them support in exchange for loyalty,” he said, noting that such actions have happened before, and although they haven’t seen it in this election, “in others, it could intensify.” Defensorxs has also raised questions about some judicial candidates. While many have extensive experience in the judicial field, Defensorxs has determined that some are “linked to organized crime, sexual offenses, political-religious sects, and other irregularities.” One of them served nearly six years in a US prison on drug offenses, after being accused of smuggling over 4 kilograms of methamphetamines, according to Reuters. That candidate said on Facebook that he faced an “unjust” judicial process and has “moved on.” Another candidate was a defense attorney who joined the team that represented drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman in 2016, a decision she has defended by telling the AP, “Everyone has a right to an effective defense.” Meza said his group has filed complaints to INE against some of those candidates but was told that electoral authorities couldn’t invalidate their candidacy at this point. If one of them ends up winning an election, Meza said, the group was told it could try to challenge the victory with the electoral tribunal. CNN has reached out to INE for more information. Public opinion A poll by Pew Research Center found that most Mexicans approve of the judicial reform. Although the policy sparked protests in September when Congress was voting on it, 66% of people surveyed earlier this year said they backed it, with approval being higher among Morena supporters and younger adults. Still, the judicial election faces heavy criticism from opposition groups. Former President Vicente Fox of the PAN party has urged people not to vote on Sunday. “The judicial election is not democratic. It’s a farce, it’s a hoax … Don’t go. Don’t waste your time,” he said on X. Several civil organizations and opposition figures have indicated that they will boycott Sunday’s vote, and some have called for a nationwide protest on election day. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has pushed back against those calls, urging Mexicans to participate in the electoral process and decide who will make up the judiciary. “It’s better for millions of people to vote than for the president and the Senate of the Republic to decide,” she said.