Mexico’s government has portrayed the election of thousands of judges, including Supreme Court magistrates, as a landmark exercise in democracy. But Mexican voters appear to disagree: only about 13 per cent of them turned out to vote on 1 June. Such a paltry level of participation promises to amplify the stark differences of opinion about Mexico’s judicial reform. President Claudia Sheinbaum called the vote a “complete success”. Critics seized on early results as evidence that her ruling MORENA party will make the judiciary do its bidding. 

Despite her upbeat reaction to the vote, the low turnout bodes poorly for the president, MORENA and the new judges. The election registered the lowest participation recorded since Mexico’s transition to multi-party democracy began in the mid-1990s. Sheinbaum threw her weight behind the vote, which was the brainchild of her predecessor, but failed to sway voters outside her party’s base. It seems that Sheinbaum’s 82 per cent approval rating does not necessarily translate into a loyal constituency, and that MORENA’s vaunted party machinery does not always deliver.

Early returns portend the partisan capture of which critics warned. Half of all federal judges and local judges in nineteen states were put to the vote. Full results will not be announced until next week, but the votes tallied so far show that all but one of the elected Supreme Court judges have close ties to the ruling party. Sheinbaum did not dispute these affinities but said the new magistrates would “deliver justice regardless of party ties”. MORENA is also poised to control the Electoral Court and a newly created Disciplinary Tribunal, which has the power to dismiss judges. Instead of shielding the judicial system from partisan interests, as the reform’s supporters said it would, the popular vote has yielded what could become subservient courts. 

Various reasons have been put forward for this outcome. Most federal candidates were first approved by committees appointed by the government and Congress. Opposition parties called on their supporters to abstain. Additionally, MORENA operatives succeeded in assembling enough voters, supplying them with “cheat sheets” outlining who to select on the complex ballot. 

The real test of this election, however, is whether it will improve or impair Mexico’s judiciary, which has long been plagued by corruption, helping perpetuate the high levels of impunity that underlie Mexico’s wave of organised crime and violence. Critics argue that electing judges will have little to no impact – or, worse, that electing inexperienced or unprofessional judges could just exacerbate the problems.

After the election, President Sheinbaum acknowledged that the process “could be improved” before 2027, when the remaining half of federal judges and local judges in thirteen states will be selected. Much of the election’s design is written into the constitution, and correcting the pitfalls will require political resolve. Meanwhile, by tying herself so closely to the judicial vote, Sheinbaum may have to carry the blame if Mexicans perceive their new judges to be no better, or even worse, than those they replaced.