The Court refuses to take measures to prevent the closure of the administration of justice

Ivan Evair Saldana

The newspaper La Jornada
Tuesday, September 3, 2024, p. 4

The plenary session of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) rejected urging the Federal Judicial Council to issue a general agreement to guarantee the jurisdictional function at the federal level in response to the strike by workers of the Federal Judicial Branch (PJF).

The request was proposed by Minister Lenia Batres Guadarrama and was discussed yesterday in a private session. It was supported only by Yasmín Esquivel Mossa, but rejected by nine ministers.

“The Supreme Court is not concerned about the suspension of more than 440,000 federal trials in progress throughout our country and is only addressing the (economic) ‘urgencies’ of the judges, despite the fact that we are public servants, obliged to look out for the general interest before our own,” Batres criticized through social media.

Two weeks ago, PJF workers began a work stoppage in protest against the judicial reform being discussed in the Chamber of Deputies.

In a statement, the minister argued that it is essential to adopt the necessary measures to guarantee the jurisdictional function. and that the strike supported by some judges and magistrates does not continue to violate the human right of access to justice.

He assured that with yesterday’s decision, Both the plenary of the CJF and the SCJN maintain their lack of interest in guaranteeing the human right of access to justice, privileging the economic concerns of judges and magistrates over the general interest of Mexicans.Batres’ proposal was submitted last Friday to the presiding judge of the Court and the CJF, Norma Lucía Piña Hernández.

In the document, the minister points out that the only organization, the National Association of Circuit Magistrates and District Judges of the Judicial Branch of the Federation, that has claimed this strike is a civil association that does not have legal status to promote a work stoppage.

Even though it is made up of judges, it does not have the scope to issue formal declarations of suspension of work and establish measures that directly affect the exercise of the rights of third parties.the document states.