Morena consummates the controversial extension of Zaldívar's mandate at the head of the Supreme Court

Arturo Zaldívar, while participating in a session, in Mexico City.Alex Cruz / EFE

Less than a week has taken Morena to approve one of the most controversial measures of the six-year term. Asserting its majority in both chambers, the ruling party first passed the roll through the Senate last Thursday to finish propping up the approval early this Friday morning in Congress. With 260 votes in favor, 167 against and two abstentions, the opinion was approved at around 4:30 am. The discussion of more than 500 reservations continues and the session is expected to last 24 hours. From its unexpected beginning, the

Zaldívar case

has provoked tons of criticism because the Constitution expressly prohibits the extension of his mandate, because it calls into question the independence of the judiciary, one of Andrés Manuel López Obrador's favorite objectives in his crusade against the institutions that he considers part of a kind of old regime, and because it elevates the government's polarizing strategy in the middle of the electoral campaign.

Much of the speed with which the measure has been approved has to do with the imminent closing of sessions of Parliament - on April 30 - ahead of the June 6 elections, which will renew both chambers. Apart from the merits, the extension of the mandate of Zaldívar, who is also president of the Council of the Judiciary, has been harshly criticized for the form. Without prior notice, the measure was sideways included in a transitory article to the judicial reform regulations. It was approved expressly, and without debate, in the Senate and with the same speed it passed to Congress, which on the same day the initiative was aired in both the Justice committee and the plenary session.

In addition to the opposition, discordant voices have appeared within Morena's own ranks. More than a dozen Moreno deputies have voted against or abstained. Among them, Porfirio Muñoz Ledo, the former president of the chamber, a member of the critical sector with the current party presidency. Deputy Lorena Villavicencio, part of the same critical sector, was very drastic during the preliminary vote in the committee: “It seems very clear to me that a transitory part of a secondary law cannot go beyond the Constitution. Doing so has the message that it seriously injures the rule of law. The message is that the Constitution does not matter and that the ends justify the principles ”.

The Constitution establishes that the maximum term for the President of the Court is four years, with no possibility of reelection for the immediately subsequent term.

Zaldívar's term expires next year, but the new measure would leave him in charge of the court until 2024, the same year that Andrés Manuel López Obrador's six-year term ends.

Jurists and international organizations, from Human Rights Watch (HRW) to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) or Amnesty International have warned of the legal abuse and the risks to judicial independence.

Constitutional reforms on the horizon

The controversy surrounding Zaldívar, a progressive magistrate aligned with Morena's agenda, is framed within a broader front: the control of the Council of the Judiciary and the approval of a series of priority reforms for the Government that would even imply a reform of the constitution itself. Since the Electricity Industry law suspended today, the Hydrocarbons Law or the constitutional reform of the Judicial Power, led by the President of the Supreme Court himself with the support of the Morenoist majority in parliament and which has encountered resistance within the judiciary itself.

Since the start of the dust storm, López Obrador has not hesitated to position himself, clearly linking the course of his political project to the future of the country's highest court and the governing body of judges. “We are not going to get another chance like this. If the period is not extended, whoever arrives will be more of the same ”, he defended during the week, without ignoring attacks against other magistrates. For example, Juan Pablo Gómez Fierro, responsible for both the suspension of the electricity law and the creation of a mobile phone registry with biometric data. The president's battle has even asked Zaldívar himself a month ago for an investigation into the judge.

Zaldívar, the first president of the court since 1994 who does not belong to the judicial career, but to the world of law, was elected by the rest of the magistrates days after Andrés Manuel López Obrador began his term promising the end of excesses and the corruption in politics. A flag of regeneration that has also moved within its own ranks. In his two long years in office, he has promoted measures to end nepotism, has disqualified or dismissed dozens of judges for corruption and has launched a program that monitors the assets of judges.

The parallel paths of the high court magistrate and the president have intersected on more than one occasion. In October 2019, before the suspension decreed by a judge of the works of the Santa Lucía airport, the Council of the Judiciary, which concentrates all the appeals before a single court, unblocked one of the largest infrastructure works of the six-year term. In October 2020, the Court also gave free rein to the controversial popular consultation launched by the Government for citizens to decide whether to try five former presidents.

Some decisions that have been interpreted by the opposition as a test of political harmony.

During the controversy, Zaldívar's links with heavyweights of the Government have also been highlighted.

Olga Sánchez Cordero, Secretary of the Interior (Interior), was an ally in their years as ministers.

During the shortlist of candidates for the presidency of the court, Zaldívar was also the favorite candidate of the legal adviser of the presidency, Julio Scherer.

The right hand of the president in legal matters has been one of the few in the Government who have come out to defend the legality of the measure confirmed this Thursday by Congress, recalling that there are two precedents in which the parliament extended the mandate of judges and magistrates .

Subscribe here

to the

newsletter

of EL PAÍS México and receive all the informative keys of the current situation of this country