Justice in Mexico is not broken. It is designed to resist change, and that resistance is not accidental: it is the product of an institutional architecture that privileges opacity, discretion and simulation.
The recent judicial reform promised to modernize the system. But while new bodies are created – such as the Judicial Disciplinary Court or the Judicial Administration Body – old vices are recycled with new names. What is the point of redesigning structures if the same logic of political capture and vertical control is maintained?
The supposed electoral legitimacy of judges and magistrates has become a façade that hides a real power vacuum, technical incompetence and a dangerous politicization that threatens to dismantle judicial independence.
The massive flight of technical personnel is not a coincidence or simple resignation: it is a symptom of a system that is collapsing from within. Advisors and specialists flee a toxic environment where political pressure and lack of autonomy are the norm. The quality of justice is at stake, and with it, citizen trust.
The institutional fragility of the Judiciary is not measured by the number of laws, but by its inability to guarantee impartial justice. Today, internal control mechanisms are weak, disciplinary processes are opaque, and the judicial career remains marked by nepotism. The Comptroller’s Office of the Judiciary, which should be a technical counterweight, operates without real autonomy or deep oversight capacity.
The most worrying thing is the judicial culture that normalizes simulation. The form is fulfilled, but the substance is eluded. The weak are punished, the ally is protected and the statistics are disguised. This logic reproduces impunity and erodes citizen trust.
Other countries have faced this dilemma with bold reforms. In Switzerland, for example, disciplinary judges are appointed by Parliament under clear and predictable rules. In Mexico, on the other hand, appointments remain opaque negotiations between judicial and political elites.
The solution is not in more cosmetic reforms. The system needs to be redesigned based on principles of transparency, citizen participation and external evaluation. Justice cannot continue to be a closed fiefdom. It must be open to public scrutiny and accountable with verifiable indicators.
Dear reader, the institutional fragility of the Judiciary is not an accident; It is a political decision. Until next time.
