Judiciary in Mexico

In all institutions where the penetrating wind of public criticism does not blow, a little corruption sprouts and grows like a mushroom: Friedrich Nietzsche, human too human,

The article you have before was written a few weeks ago; In an act of self-censorship I refrained from publishing, today I am making it public in support of the mega-squatters organized by Escudo por AMLO before the Supreme Court of Justice. I spread it without any change or modification.

The Judiciary in Mexico as part of the state has the task of taking care of and implementing the laws contained in the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, its ordinances and statutes; However, over the past five years, there have been many allegations and expressions of distrust towards the judges’ norms and resolutions; Severe criticism has also been issued towards some ministers and magistrates, who have been accused of collusion with enemies of 4T and, in the most serious cases, of acts of corruption by some judges; The suspension of Plan B of electoral reform and other presidential initiatives, as well as the granting of injunctions to former officials accused of crimes against the country, are emblematic examples.

What is indisputable is that this situation reflects a serious disagreement between the powers as the judiciary takes conflicting views with the executive and the legislature. These anomalies, if they continue, may lead to the lack of security of the society in the problems of justice, as well as to the threat of collective harmony due to misuse of the law; The greatest risk at this time is making it impossible for other powers, especially the executive, to exercise and exercise sovereignty, when judges in situations involving national interests use norms as a tool to prevent immediate and urgent social claims. because they moment. Protecting national natural resources: land (mining), protected natural areas, economic interests of the country, cultural and social which are necessary and the state to guarantee the sovereignty of the nation and to protect in defense and security bound to. of the population.

The status quo is the product of the interference of economic power networks in the defense and protection of their interests; Completely normal phenomenon in a system like neoliberalism in which money is god; In such situations, it is enough to make the law a commodity that is sold to the highest bidder and everything is settled.

Once process is established, placing a case in the hands of a judge does not guarantee that justice will be done; Well, as Solon said: “He who can do much makes a net of laws, for they entangle the light and the less strong, but he who is great breaks them and escapes” ( Diogenes Laertius. Lives of the Most Illustrious Philosophers. Editorial Group Vol.). Indeed, when law is transmissible, the rules governing the legal system do not make legally correct decisions, much less, because both the law and the law are subject to power relations; As a result, they cannot conduct, disseminate and act related to justice, because there are factors that distort legal truth, for example: corruption, bribery, ideology, beliefs, commitments, dishonesty, lack of ethics and non-compliance. scientific identity.

On the other hand, as Michel Foucault affirms, “Laws are traps; They are not limits to power at all, but instruments of power; Not an instrument of justice to rule, but a tool to ensure certain interests ”(protect society, FCE).

Similarly, law is not a static norm but a random result of legislative conflicts; Not all legal initiatives are the product of genius ideas of some deputy, executive or human passion, in most cases they are motivated by public utility or are proposed for the benefit, convenience or interests of the country and its citizens. An unhealthy intention to benefit a group or social class. They don’t act this way when legitimacy has allowed their perversion.

Throughout Mexico’s history, the legal system has primarily maintained a perspective that is identified with a “legal” interpretation of the law, characterized by reducing the judge’s work to strict adherence to the letter of the law, a Sophisticated form autocratic. legal, because the arbitrator, as such, behaves irresponsibly with respect to his acts and renders his assessments false and worthless, because they are conditioned by the design and inclination to his duty, because he abandoned the pursuit of clarity is the case, for the discretion that must accompany his decision, as well as the wisdom and knowledge that must distinguish who has the responsibility to apply the law, without submitting to predetermined goals in his authority. Furthermore, by virtue of their power of affection, judges are bound to take into account the context, conditions and circumstances making up the dispute; If their commitment is to do justice to their duties and strict adherence to the non-scriptural norms of their ministry, they must keep their judgments free from doctrinal, ideological biases or being corrupted by fraud. Justice ceases to be justice when it ignores that the interpretation of the rule should not be literal or operate like a machine without any moral quotient, but motivated by the presumptions of justice. Justice and legal considerations which involve social or national interests in general are not exhausted by judicial interpretation nor can they act as a weapon in the hands of the judge; On the contrary, it must be adapted to the circumstances of the facts and because law and justice are meant to protect the weak; Strictly speaking, justice is a relationship of convenience between conflicting interests, but truth prevails only when the arbitrator, through his wisdom and mercy, integrates law and justice to achieve equality.

The judge does not fulfill his functions when he relies on the letter code and logically deduces from the application of its articles to conclude the case; This task may at first seem irrelevant and objective but it is not enough, without any contribution and without any creative dimension to include the concept of process in the legal norm for its solution, otherwise any fifth-rate lawyer It is possible Minister of Court, Magistrate or Judge.

On the other hand, if the sentence is based on the yardstick of justice and not on law, the judge will be compelled to know the factors which gave rise to the issue and consider the vital needs of the parties. In any closed legal system, the judge does not add anything new to what is expressed in the law. Why not consider the possibility of a regulatory system to integrate new elements arising out of the changing circumstances and conditions of a complex society hungry for justice?

Zygmunt Bauman states that “if we accept that present-day human societies are highly complex, formal logic in modern law is insufficient because of the static conception of things, because it sees concrete objects, cut, isolated in time and environment”. And today we live in fluid times that, because of their complexity, require logic and complex thought; if we are to be coherent, we must learn to handle contradictions through dialogue” (liquid time, FCE); The simplistic and reductionist thinking that dominates Mexican law unfortunately ignores the complexity and perpetuates itself as an unhelpful argument in a forced adaptation to reality that, due to its insurmountable logical difficulties, fails to provide satisfactory solutions and solutions. Drops off without problems. Human and common interest.

Furthermore, legal interpretation of law cannot be guided by special interests, it must be the work of spiritually constituted wise men who pursue the moral goals of justice; In other words, if you want to go beyond existing legal techniques, you must combine them. Nature of the judge, as a guarantor of the humanistic exercise of justice.

The ethical behavior of a judge is inseparably linked with his Nature personal and, therefore, it is a way of being in situations of a moral nature; A Nature Solid, fair and a keen sense of reality will never side with injustice at any cost; Neither would it be in favor of severity when it comes to awarding punishment, nor would it be unethical when mediating a dispute. An ethical person has no other quality than an honest approach to his life, conduct, duties and professional responsibilities, besides being attached to truthfulness as a fundamental quality. before this Nature The other ethics of straight and honest personnel have no validity. The fairness of the trial does not end with the sanction or the observance of the law; Because of its ethical origins, justice is committed to the ethics, ethos of the judge, and the deontology governing the exercise of professional duties (Melvin Cantrell Gamboa. Ethics and Theology of the Civil Servant, Hobbiton Edition. Mexico, 2001).

melvin cantrell gamboa

He was born in 1940 in Campeche, Campeche. He studied philosophy at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). He is a former university professor (Universidad Iberoamericana and Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa). He is also the author of two treatises on ethics. He is a former director of radio and TV programmes. He currently resides in Mazatlán, Sinaloa.