Mexico is poised to amend its constitution this weekend to require all judges to be elected as part of a judicial overhaul championed by the outgoing president but slammed by critics as a blow to the country’s rule of law.
  • Zloubida@lemmy.world
    18·
    2 months ago

    Strong and diverse press, strong and enforced rules against politically motivated decisions. A judge should know that, if they don’t strictly follow the law, they’ll lose their job. This won’t make the thing perfect, but far better than officially political judges.

            • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
              3·
              2 months ago

              You seem quite competent in researching from Wikipedia. Could you point me to the part of the article mentioning how fascism is related to women feminist presidents with a PhD, democratically and legtimately elected with a remarkable progressive agenda?

      • Zloubida@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 months ago

        So how would the judges be appointed under this system and why is it better than having them chosen from the people?

        By competition and diploma. A judge is a legal technician. Why elect him on political bases? We do not elect an engineer on political criteria, we take the one who seems the best among the candidates.

        If the current system hasn’t prevented political influence, then the method of choosing obviously isn’t guaranteeing unbiased judges anyway, so what’s the point in keeping it as opposed to elected judges?

        What’s the point to elect them?

        • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
          6·
          2 months ago

          There are plenty of lawyers prepared to be judges in Mexico, competition and diplomas are gonna be a part of the process. Corrupt judges do have titles and diplomas after all. The democratic element is to complete a pre-selection made by the Congress, the Executive and the Judicial powers, at least for magistrates and the Supreme Court.