A spectacle of democracy… or whatever this was
Ah, the judicial election in Mexico. An event as exciting as watching paint dry, but with less citizen participation. On June 1, with an overwhelming 13% attendance (which was actually 9% effective, because, of course, why count those who just went to sign and run?), it was decided who would occupy 2,681 key positions in the judicial system. Yes, those same ones who are supposed to be impartial, independent and, above all, not chosen in what seems like a raffle.
The PAN, always ready for the “I warned”
The PAN legislators, those eternal killjoys of Mexican politics, did not waste time in coming out with their most grandiose “I told you so.” Marko Cortés, senator and probably the only one who still believes in transparency in this country, demanded that the government “accept and heed” the recommendations of the OAS. Because, of course, when an international organization tells you that your judicial electoral process was more irregular than a soccer match refereed by a drunk, the least you can do is pretend to care.
The OAS, in its preliminary report, noted that the process was as transparent as a concrete wall: without guarantees of equity, with deadlines shorter than the patience of a child in a line, and with a polarization that would make Twitter seem like a civilized place. But hey, at least there was no violence… because almost no one went to vote.
Sheinbaum and the art of ignoring the obvious
Daniel Chimal, PAN deputy and another member of the “no one pays attention to us” club, asked President Claudia Sheinbaum to “reflect” on impunity and the weakening of institutions. Because, obviously, if there is something that this government has proven to be good at, it is reflecting… on how to ignore criticism.
And not content with that, the PAN members also suggested to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that it stop acting as “Sheinbaum’s defense committee” and start behaving like, I don’t know, a serious institution! But hey, asking this government for political tact is like asking a cat not to get on the table: technically possible, but in practice, a dream come true.
The OAS does not recommend this model… would anyone really do it?
Jorge Romero, president of the PAN, celebrated (with a smile of “we already knew this was going to happen”) that the OAS confirmed what they have been saying from the beginning: this model of judicial election is as democratic as a dictatorship with optional votes. The organization even warned that it does not recommend that other countries copy it. What a surprise. Who would have imagined that a system with 13% participation and zero guarantees was not exactly the example to follow?
Romero, with that mixture of sarcasm and desperation that only an opponent in Mexico can master, concluded: “Throwing away the Judiciary is not a reform: it is an authoritarian regression.” And then we wonder why people prefer to watch soap operas instead of political news.
So there you have it, friends: a judicial process that seems more like a poorly told joke than a democratic exercise, a government that turns a deaf ear, and an opposition that, at least, can claim the title of “those who were right.” What’s next? A lottery to elect the next president? Wait… let’s not give ideas.
Did this news outrage you? Share it and let everyone know the circus we live in! Or better yet, explore more content about how Mexican politics continues to push the boundaries of absurdity.
