Mexico’s president told reporters Tuesday he has put relations with the United States and Canadian embassies “on pause” after the two countries voiced concerns over a proposed judicial overhaul that critics say could undermine the independence of the judiciary.
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador didn’t elaborate on what a pause would mean. It’s not a term used in formal diplomatic codes, and Mexico’s foreign ministry did not respond to an Associated Press request for comment about what it would entail.
The judicial overhaul proposal, suggested by the Mexican president during his final weeks in office, includes having judges elected to office, something analysts, judges and international observers fear would stack courts with politically biased judges with little experience. It has spurred major protests and strikes and wide criticism from investors and financial institutions.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Associated Press:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source“Slammed!”
having judges elected to office, something analysts, judges and international observers fear would stack courts with politically biased judges with little experience.
Well, judging by the US where the vast majority if not all judges are either elected or appointed by elected officials, it’s clearly a justified worry, what with all the incompetent and/or corrupt judges littering benches at all levels…
It seems like “on pause” means very little here except as a gesture of displeasure at the US and Canadians’ expressions of displeasure at the proposed judicial reforms.
Most diplomatic gestures are just that. Most actual diplomacy continues regardless.
This is very confusing…
So the people against the plan are “investors and financial institutions”. And people want the president to “respect democracy”.
But the plan is to have judges be democratically elected instead of appointed?
Feels like the elites don’t like this plan cause it’ll be slightly harder to handpick their guys to the courts, and are on a media campaign against it.
America’s ‘democratically elected judges’ are not unbiased. Just look at SCOTUS ffs. Those judges were elected to every judgeship they had previously yet some can’t seem to reason themselves out of a wet paper back.
deleted by creator
Where does it say it will be picked by the state ?
deleted by creator
We don’t pick our judges here in America, and they’re plenty partisan as it is. How much experience did ACB or Cannon have?
Something tells me this is just the complaints of rich people being mad that they might not be able to pick the judges themselves.
Bingo!, yes, they are worried elected judges will not choose the rich above regular people.
deleted by creator
