The INE will continue the process against six councilors after a ruling by the Electoral Court

Fabiola Martinez

La Jornada Newspaper
Thursday, October 23, 2025, p. 12

The Internal Control Body (OIC) of the National Electoral Institute (INE) will continue the process against the six councilors accused of incurring serious administrative responsibility because in 2021 they voted in favor of extending the consultation to revoke the mandate of the then president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

The above, after by majority vote (four to two), the upper chamber of the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (TEPJF) declared inadmissible the lawsuit filed by Claudia Zavala, counselor of the INE.

Therefore, upon concluding that it is not an electoral matter, the case will end up in the Federal Court of Administrative Justice and the councilors involved will be able to fight it in that area or by means of amparo, but not in the TEPJF.

Felipe Fuentes, rapporteur of the case, said that the upper chamber “is legally incompetent to hear the matter, because the authority that issued the contested act is not electoral in nature.” He pointed out that the administrative procedure has not concluded, “and therefore there is no firm declaration of sanction that could leave the plaintiff in a state of defenselessness.”

This reasoning was shared by judges Gilberto Bátiz, Claudia Valle and Felipe de la Mata, while Mónica Soto (president of the TEPJF) and Janine Otálora insisted on the need to get into the matter in depth, especially to determine if the OIC’s actions violate the independence of the electoral authority.

They only agreed that the TEPJF ruling does not mean confirming or endorsing any sanctions against directors, but the difference persisted regarding the scope of the OIC; Although directors are obligated subjects of the existing legal framework to prevent, detect and sanction administrative responsibilities and acts of corruption, voting in the council would not be within that scope and the electoral function would then be affected.

Otálora and Soto said that it was necessary to admit the trial and define whether there is a violation of the powers of the INE or whether values ​​and principles entrusted to the directors are affected, “and thereby protect the independence and impartiality of the authorities.”

They stressed that even in the face of an unfounded decision, it would be up to the TEPJF to revoke to correct any decision of the INE, as happened in this matter, when with a ruling the superior court ordered it to carry out this mandate revocation consultation, even with budgetary restrictions.

“If this is not analyzed, it could go so far as to implicitly validate that with each decision of the institute that is revoked by the Electoral Court, a cause would be found to presume serious administrative responsibility of its members and thereby enable a tool that violates the principles of impartiality and independence,” Otálora warned.