Fabiola Martinez
La Jornada Newspaper
Sunday, January 11, 2026, p. 9
While President Claudia Sheinbaum announced that the electoral reform initiative could be made public the third week of January, the advisors and senior officials of the National Electoral Institute (INE) were once again divided, especially over the way of processing the proposal that they will deliver tomorrow to the presidential commission in charge of processing possible constitutional and legal changes.
In an internal chronology of the INE it is stated that the work began on October 24 and 318 “original proposals” were collected from the ministries and 620 technical opinions from the institute’s management, while counselors warn of disorganization.
“Session after session of the council table I was asking for that document and it finally arrived in December, I think it was too late. It did not contain proposals from the councils, but from the technical areas,” Carla Humphrey, who is also president of the Federal Voter Registry Commission, told this newspaper.
complicated month
“It has been a complicated month to gather these proposals; since we returned from vacation, in September, I began to ask for the analysis document, from (which would arise) the proposals that we were going to send, which was going to be integrated, (and I asked) if the working group that had been left to be formed was going to be confirmed.”
In this way, he regretted, the internal official report marks different phases of the “institutional evaluation strategy”, both in the General Executive Board – where the main officials are concentrated – and in the decentralized structure of the institute, as well as with local public organizations. They even mention a “work table” with the matches held on October 29.
The document “Proposals for regulatory improvements”, to which Humphrey alluded – criticized by the majority of the councilors – was finally made known to them on December 5 and a deadline was set for the delivery of observations, and it only refers to the fact that on the 22nd of that month they received the “votes for each proposal” from the councilor Norma de la Cruz.
Although later the chronology indicates that seven directors (Humphrey, Dania Ravel, Jaime Rivera, Uuc-kib Espadas, Rita López, Martín Faz and Arturo Castillo) made a total of 221 observations to the document “which was generated as a result of the institutional evaluation strategy”, while the directorates, technical units and coordinations made 278 technical opinions.
