“They will make me teach them and they will sweep me away”
Fernando Miguez is a court clerk and since 2000 he has “crossed” all positions within the judicial ladder. He regrets that becoming a judge no longer depends on preparation, but on a popular election and even raffles.
“I have been meritorious, a judicial officer, actuary and secretary of a court and secretary of the collegiate court. I went through all the positions and now I have 24 years in the institution. But right now I would have to submit to a tombola to become a Judge, where “The decision no longer depends on preparation,” he explains.
“Yes, the judicial career exams will continue, but not to be a judge anymore.”
The exams were in three stages, which took place over an average of three months. One about knowledge, in which up to 3,000 people participated and 100 questions on different topics were answered.
Around 150 applicants went to the second stage, all competing for 20 or 30 places; They had to prepare a draft sentence from scratch in five hours to demonstrate their knowledge of laws, jurisprudence, treaties and international conventions, in addition to the structure of the projects.
Afterwards they were submitted to a synod with three people (judges, ministers or counselors) and defended the professional examination before them, orally. If there was a tie, the one with the most education, the most courses or the greatest seniority stayed.
“The standards to be a judge were very strict, very high. Today an Evaluation Committee will subject you to a tombola and there neither capacity nor professionalization counts.”
Fernando Miguez, secretary of the federal court.
For the secretary, the judicial career will practically disappear, since everything “is in place,” he says, for suitable judges to arrive.
“And those who arrive will not only not be the most qualified, but they will have commitments they made in order to win their election and therefore they have to fulfill them. They are going to tell me: ‘Fernando: you are leaving. I don’t trust you.’ ”, he explains.
“Of course, it is possible that I teach him first or that they make me teach him. And since you learned, sweep me away, take me away. That is the issue with the judicial career, it is not guaranteed with the new law. Who is going to benefit from working like this? If even the judges are going to be sanctioned for their legal criteria,” he assesses.
To compete with the rules that exist
Like Puente and Ortiz, Juan Carlos García Campos, secretary of the Collegiate Circuit Court on Labor Matters, considers that the judicial career, as it was known, practically came to an end due to a smear campaign that he describes as unfair.
But now the most relevant risk, he explains, is the fate that the administration of justice and the country itself will have, without the knowledge and experience of its judges.
This is because, remember, to be a judge required at least five years of experience in the position of court clerk. And to be a magistrate, five years as head of the court; Today they will be able to arrive practically fresh out of their degree and without experience.
“Let’s forget about labor rights or the rights that we believed we would have all our lives and that perhaps in a few years we could exercise (and advance). No, the risk is for the country because we will have a low-level administration of justice,” he warns.
“Maybe someone says: ‘What does it matter to me, I’ve never been sued.’ But at some point in life we are going to need a fair judge, a court that is willing to resolve without arbitrariness, without receiving a line. That is what we will face,” says García Campos, with 16 years of judicial career.
Therefore, unlike his classmates, he did register and compete to be a judge. He estimates that, like him, hundreds of secretaries signed up to compete and be judges or magistrates.
“Perhaps the average worker in the Judiciary, as well as judges or magistrates, are disappointed with the reform, but we must continue moving forward. We must adapt to the rules and try to contend so that the Judiciary continues with the seriousness that has characterized it,” he considers.
“Now it is a curricular review, a tombola and the electorate, but being a judge will no longer depend on knowledge or aptitudes, but on sympathies to win votes, we are going to have many spontaneous candidates and the title and luck will be enough.”
Itzel Checa, general coordinator of the Appointments observatory, recalled that, until now, the Judicial School decides who stays in the clerk positions on a collegial basis, after reviewing qualifications and seniority. But since the Judicial Reform is not clear on this issue, he says, the appointments can be subject to discretion.
“The Judicial School, in a certain way in a collegiate manner, had the definition of who was promoted in the judicial career, but now with this reform who will make the final decisions of who is promoted or not, since they are the heads of the Judicial Branch or of the organs,” Czech criticizes.
“The criteria for decisions are now too general, ambiguous and when the provisions are this broad, it actually allows for a biased interpretation. Therefore, far from being a race mechanism, with certainties, it does not generate them or in promotions or removals.”
