11mo ago

Mexico will amend its constitution this weekend to require all judges to be elected

apnews.com

World News @lemmy.world

MicroWave @lemmy.world

11mo ago

Mexico will amend its constitution this weekend to require all judges to be elected

apnews.com /article/president-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador-judicial-overhaul-democracy-protests-7c13b20ef398264378dcdf1971a9a5d2

World News @lemmit.online

Lemmit.Online bot @lemmit.online

BOT

11mo ago

Mexico will amend its constitution this weekend to require all judges to be elected

apnews.com /article/president-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador-judicial-overhaul-democracy-protests-7c13b20ef398264378dcdf1971a9a5d2

52 comments

The idea that judges shouldn't be elected is deeply rooted in the reactionary ideology of an aristocracy that believed the masses shouldn't be trusted with any decisions that actually matter and should be regarded with suspicion instead of trusted with decisions.
- Judges shouldnt be elected for the same reasons surgeons shouldnt be elected.
  
  This logic can be applied to lawmakers too.
  What's the difference?
  
  I'm sure as hell I'd want to choose between surgeons. For example, I'd easily choose the one not trafficking organs.
- Yeah but have you seen what the masses choose sometimes?
  
  Always great to see how libs who never stop bleating about authoritarianism, don't actually believe in democracy themselves.
This is probably the worst option. Judges should be professional and not populists pandering to the public.
- Literally reactionary.
  This ideology is what lead to the US having a fascist Court.
- What? Democratically appointed judges? That’s amazing , wonder why the US hasn’t thought of this? Ohh right that’s because we give way too much power to the one in office. This is great for Mexico now the US needs to do this.
  
  Several states have elected Supreme Court Justices. Across the states, it has been seen that rulings are generally more inconsistent.
  That said, Mexico has civil law instead of common law where legal precedent carries a lot less value.
- If there are education and experience requirements imposed on judicial candidates, and then they are elected, this is not an issue. Because those who are elected are accountable to those who elected them
  (provided they can be removed from.power by the same people, which is one of those "checks and balances" Western "democracies " have imposed so we can't remove them).
  That way you have professionals/experts who are accountable to the people. Obviously elections can always be tampered with and influenced by powerful and moneyed interests, but by assuming this is true and then making it the default is a bit daft tbh.
- So they should only pander to the political class? That seems great...
- How does one be a populist while not pandering to the public.
  
  They're saying they shouldn't be. Unless you're trying to say their statement is redundant?
The very same reaction to the amend shows how urgent it is to to change the judicial system. I'm glad this was done and I can't wait to vote corrupt judges out of office.
Interesting. If judges are going to be political regardless, I don't see another option for democracies.
- Strong and diverse press, strong and enforced rules against politically motivated decisions. A judge should know that, if they don't strictly follow the law, they'll lose their job. This won't make the thing perfect, but far better than officially political judges.
- There is no such thing as an apolitical judge. The judges you see as apolitical are just centrists supporting the status quo, but that is not actually an apolitical frame of action.

52 comments