The judicial reform approved in Mexico in 2024 is part of a package of 20 reforms proposed by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. This reform focuses on three key areas:
Popular election of judges and magistrates: the ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN), as well as the members of the Superior Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal, will be elected by direct vote. This amendment to Article 95 of the Constitution changes the current process, where the President proposes a short list of three candidates, which is voted by the Senate. In addition, it establishes that judges may serve for up to 12 years.
Reduction of ministers in the SCJN: The number of ministers of the Court will be reduced from 11 to 9, and their term of office will be shortened from 15 to 12 years. The current two chambers will also be eliminated, holding all sessions in plenary.
Transparency and rotating election of the presidency: The presidency of the SCJN will rotate every two years, based on the results of the votes of the ministers. This change seeks greater transparency and public participation.
The approval of this reform has generated political tensions, both within the country and the perception on the international scene. However, most state congresses ratified the reform quickly, allowing its enactment on September 15, 2024.
These changes could have several effects on tax and commercial litigation issues, given that it introduces significant structural changes in the Judicial Branch and in the way judges and magistrates are selected.
POPULAR ELECTION OF JUDGES AND MAGISTRATES:
With the reform, judges and magistrates will be elected by direct vote, which could have an impact on how tax and commercial litigation is handled. Given that these areas are often technically complex and require a high degree of specialization, there is a concern that popular selection may prioritize political or popularity factors over technical knowledge and impartiality. This could affect the quality of rulings in tax or commercial cases involving sophisticated disputes between taxpayers and the tax authority or between companies.
GREATER TRANSPARENCY IN THE SCJN:
Eliminating the two chambers of the Supreme Court and having all sessions in plenary could make decisions in tax and mercantile matters more transparent and accessible to the public. By allowing all sessions to be open and public, rulings on these issues would be more exposed to public scrutiny, which could influence judges’ decisions. However, it could also lead to greater political pressure in high-profile cases involving large corporations or sensitive tax issues.
REDUCTION OF MINISTERS AND LENGTH OF TENURE:
Reducing the number of Supreme Court justices from 11 to 9, along with reducing the term from 15 to 12 years, could make fewer justices available to hear the backlog of tax and commercial cases coming before the Court. This could lead to greater congestion in the resolution of litigation in these areas or prioritization of certain types of cases, affecting resolution times.
POTENTIAL IMPACT ON LEGAL CERTAINTY:
By modifying the judicial structure and increasing political influence over the appointment of judges, uncertainty could be generated in the stability of the judicial system in tax and commercial matters. Businesses and taxpayers could perceive greater volatility in judicial decisions, which would impact their litigation strategies and their confidence in the impartiality of the system.
In summary, although the reform seeks to increase transparency and citizen participation, its implementation in specialized areas such as tax and commercial litigation poses challenges related to technical specialization and judicial independence.