They raise demands
The Evaluation Committee made up of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) later issued its call to receive the documentation of those who aspire to a judicial position, and it included reinforced requirements.
For example, the obligation to pass a written knowledge exam was established, which will be prepared with proposals from the Federal School of Judicial Training and various institutions and research centers.
Honesty and good reputation will not have a score but will be taken for granted unless there is evidence to the contrary, so a microsite will be enabled so that any interested person can provide evidence that demonstrates that an applicant lacks honesty and/or good reputation or public fame. .
The test will have a value of 40% of the grade corresponding to the suitability evaluation; training and academic activities 40% and the interview 20%.
The exam will be on January 13 and 14 for magistrates of the Judicial Disciplinary Court and the Superior and Regional Chamber of the Electoral Court of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (TEPJF). They will be from January 15 to 17 for magistrates of Collegiate Circuit Courts and those who aspire to be heads of courts.
In addition, a public interview will be carried out with a value of 20% within the suitability evaluation. This phase will be from January 15 to 23.
However, only candidates for positions of ministers of the SCJN, magistrates of the Judicial Disciplinary Court and those of the Superior Chamber and Regional Chambers of the TEPJF will be interviewed.
The Court Committee raised the standards for those who want a position, so that a specific methodology is established to review the academic history of interested persons, and a scoring system to evaluate professional activity, academic training and academic activity.
The score for this phase will be 40% within the general suitability evaluation. Of that percentage, 40% will correspond to verifiable professional activity, another 40% to academic training and 20% to academic activity.
Affirmative actions
Unlike the call issued by the Legislative Branch, once the suitable profiles are defined, and before proceeding to the raffle, the possibility of ties is foreseen in the lists of the best evaluated people.
In this phase it is established that the committee will apply affirmative actions on interculturality, disability and gender, “giving priority to eligible people who have two or more conditions of vulnerability, then people with disabilities, indigenous people and finally non-binary people or other members of the LGBTIQ+ collective.”
If the tie were in a circuit with a high indigenous or Afro-Mexican presence, priority will be given to those who identify themselves as belonging to a group or community with a presence in that circuit. “In the case of non-binary people, they held positions intended for indistinct gender.”
Likewise, the possibility of “reasonable adjustments” is included when the applicant has a disability condition and needs some condition such as furniture, change in the modality of appearances, cognitive breaks, easy reading formats, flexibility in the schedule, interpretation in the language of Mexican signs, communication in Braille, support personnel or assistance animals, among others to be able to participate in equality.
Causes for disqualification are also established, including having provided false information or having incurred omissions or irregularities. In general, disqualification occurs in the event of “any conduct that translates into academic and professional dishonesty during evaluations.”
Carrying out procedures, holding interviews or managing the process with any person involved in the CE process will also be cause for disqualification.
