David Arizmendi, Press Attaché of the United States Embassy in Mexicounderlines in an interview with El Sol de México the importance of having a solid and well-trained Judicial Branch. According to Arizmendipreparation and experience judicial are essential to ensure that judges can apply the law impartially and fairlyavoiding decisions that may be influenced by public opinion or particular interests. It also highlights the importance of maintaining the independence of the Judiciary to protect the economic and political stability of the region, warning that a politicized judicial system in Mexico could have negative consequences not only for the country, but also for the bilateral relationship and foreign investment within the framework of the T-MEC.
—Why is it important for judges to be well prepared and have the necessary skills in the United States?
—We hope that they are well prepared and have judicial capabilities. We have judicial capabilities in USA because they help ensure that judges have the experience and impartiality legal necessary for interpret and apply the law effectively. Judges have a special job, and we need them to have special skills. We need judges who can uphold the Rule of Lawprotect the rights of the individual and ensure that justice is done. If judges do not have the specific expertise to do so, this could lead to inconsistent rulings, reduced public confidence in the legal system and unfair outcomes. Would you want to be operated on by a doctor who was chosen to operate but had little or no experience relevant to your condition?
—Why do people complain about the direct election of judges if this position exists in the United States?
—Thanks for the question. Because there is inaccurate information circulating about this. It is true that in some states USA judges are elected. But there are some important caveats. First, only seven states have partisan elections for judges. This is the exception, not the rule. And even more important, No federal judge is elected by popular vote. We have two types of Judges in the United States: Federal and State. This is because we have two cutting systemslikewise, federal court and state court. And they do different things. Federal judges handle specific issues, such as important issues about government and the Constitutionand also high-profile criminal cases such as corruption. Not a single federal judge is elected in USA. That’s because directly electing judges can create a number of challenges. First, as he said, Ambassador Salazar, There is a risk of politicizing the Judiciary. Judges may feel pressured to make decisions based on public opinion or the interests of people who directly or indirectly financed their campaign, rather than on the principles of law. This can lead to decisions that prioritize votes rather than justice. Judges should represent the law, not the people. USAwe have a theory of government: “We are a nation of laws, not of people”. Directly elected judges can also be susceptible to influence from organized crime, which may try to persuade judges through illicit funding or threats. We do not currently have a major problem with organized crime in the United States, but the risk exists and has affected us throughout our history. That influence can severely affect the integrity of the judiciary. Judiciaryleaving it more vulnerable to corruption and less able to administer justice fairly to all.
—Doesn’t the United States promote democracy? Isn’t voting for judges more democratic?
—Of course. The United States promotes democracybut democracy is not just about voting. Our system is also about protecting institutions that need to be solid and strong to ensure the rule of law and the rights of each person. Judges often need to make decisions that are not popular. While voting for the judges may seem more democratic at first glance, it may, in fact, threaten the independence of the Judiciaryas it focuses judges more on what is popular than what is right. For this reason, in many states in the United States, there is a merit-based selection process for judges. Judges are appointed based on their abilities. Then, in some states, they have retention votes, so that if they have been corrupt or have not done a good job, they can be voted out of office. This is a good middle ground that allows for democratic participation while maintaining the integrity and ability of the judge. Judiciary.
We need judges who can uphold the rule of law, protect the rights of the individual and ensure that justice is done.
David Arizmendi, Press Attaché at the US Embassy
—You’ve explained to us how they do it in the US. But why are they interested in what we do here in the United States?
—United States and Mexico We are partners at an unprecedented level, and this historic partnership has the potential to tremendously improve both of our nations. This is already happening. It is happening economically. Mexico and the United States are each other’s largest trading partner, and we share the largest trade relationship in history with the exchange of goods and services worth more than $860 billion annually. What a lot! It’s not an accident. It’s because of the hard work of the administrations of President Biden and President López Obrador. It’s because of the certainty that lasting agreements like the one provide us Mexico-United States-Canada Treaty (USMCA), and by our shared democratic institutions and values, which also provide confidence to investors. It’s not 1900 anymore. Our nations do not coexist independently. We are partners, and our partnership means we have shared interests. The integrity of the courts, our economic ties, security, and the ability of judges to hold criminals accountable on both sides of the border—all of these impact the interests of our citizens. USA in a deep and meaningful way. We should be happy about that because it represents how deep our partnership is. If there is a perception that the Judicial Branch of Mexico It is not integral, that is not just a problem for Mexico. It is a problem for us and for North American integration as well. It can lead to greater regional instability, impact bilateral relations, and directly affect American companies that operate, invest, and create jobs in Mexico.
—Why might investment in Mexico have an impact?
—Thank you for the opportunity to answer that. What do people look for when they want to invest? Stability. Things being predictable. Investors look for environments where the legal system is stablepredictable and impartial. They want to know that if they have a contract in another country and someone fails to honor it, they have a place where they can take their case and enforce their rights. That place is an impartial court. If the court is perceived to be Judiciary in Mexico If the country is politicized or corrupt or lacks independence, investors will not find the certainty they seek. They will worry that their case will be decided by an inexperienced judge looking to please various interests. As a result, companies may choose to invest less here, and Mexico would miss out on the jobs that investment would generate. This would be an unfortunate setback for the growth we have seen under the T-MEC.
—Can you explain how this relates to the USMCA?
—Sure. It’s a long and complex agreement, but basically the Mexico-United States-Canada Treaty (T-MEC) is a treaty that helps our three countries resolve trade disputes and enforce the laws of the agreement. As I mentioned, it is crucial that Mexico has a stable, predictable, experienced and independent judiciary to implement the provisions of the agreement. USMCA. Many clauses of the USMCA They are enforced by Mexican courts. If these courts are seen as weak or politicized, this can lead to challenges in enforcing the treaty. Treaties must be enforced, so this can ultimately affect trade relations and investment flows between USMCA member countries. We need a judiciary reliable and impartial in all three member countries.
➡️ Join El Sol de México’s WhatsApp channel to not miss the most important information
—The fact that you are talking about this, isn’t it a sign that they are violating Mexico’s sovereignty?
—Ambassador Salazar and many others in the United States government have repeatedly recognized the inviolable importance of Mexican sovereignty. This decision, of course, will ultimately rest with the people of Mexico. But Mexico is our partner, and when someone takes steps that negatively impact a partner, it is a matter for both to discuss. Mexico’s leaders and citizens have the right to comment on actions in the United States, and in fact do so on a regular basis. We encourage the open exchange of ideas, because freedom of expression is another enduring value our countries share.