Legal battle: Opposition demands annulment of judicial election

The PRI, PAN, and PRD have filed a formal challenge to annul the judicial election, denouncing a process tainted by the use of "accordions" and voter coercion. Discover the key arguments in this fight that will define the future of justice in Mexico.

The battle for the judiciary has moved to the courts. The opposition, led by the PRI and PAN, has launched a legal offensive before the TEPJF (Judicial Electoral Tribunal) to invalidate the results of the election of judges and magistrates, arguing that it was an illegitimate and fraudulent process.

The electoral fallout from the renewal of the judiciary has unleashed a legal battle that promises to redefine the balance of power in Mexico. The opposition parties (PRI, PAN, and PRD) have filed a legal challenge before the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary (TEPJF) with a clear objective: the complete annulment of the election.

PRI national leader Alejandro "Alito" Moreno and PAN leader Marko Cortés have spearheaded the offensive, filing a citizen lawsuit (JDC) alleging a series of serious irregularities that, in their view, vitiated the democratic process from the outset. This action is not just a complaint, but a strategic battle to delegitimize the new justice system from its inception.

The Key Arguments of the Impeachment

The opposition's legal strategy focuses on several pillars that seek to demonstrate that the election was a "farce" and not a genuine democratic exercise:

* Use of "Accordions" and Voter Coercion: The central argument is the mass distribution of "accordions" or pre-filled voting guides promoting candidates aligned with the ruling party. The opposition maintains that this constitutes voter coercion and a flagrant violation of the principle of fairness in the election. The results, they claim, confirm that those who appeared in these guides were the ones who won.

* Lack of Legitimacy Due to Low Participation: With citizen participation hovering between 13% and 16% of the electoral roll, the opposition argues that the results lack the legitimacy and popular support necessary for a reform of such magnitude.

* Violation of Constitutional Principles: The lawsuit alleges a breach of the principles of certainty, legality, authenticity, and impartiality, essential elements of any democratic election, according to the Constitution.

"Today we raise our voices for millions of Mexicans who demand strong, autonomous, and dignified institutions. We will not allow abuses to be normalized or authoritarianism to prevail." – Alejandro Moreno, National Leader of the PRI.

A Long-Term Political Battle

Although the annulment of a national election is a legally complex and unlikely scenario, the opposition's actions have a clear strategic undertone. Beyond the outcome in the TEPJF, the objective is to build a narrative of illegitimacy around the new judges, magistrates, and ministers.

By sowing doubt about the origins of his appointment, the opposition is preparing to challenge each of his future rulings, arguing that they respond to political interests rather than the law. This strategy seeks to erode the credibility of the new judiciary before it even begins to fully operate, framing the reform as an authoritarian act rather than a democratic advance.

For their part, the government and its supporters have dismissed the accusations, arguing that turnout exceeded that of previous elections and that more citizens voted in this election than for the opposition in the 2024 presidential elections, hailing it as an unprecedented democratic success. The TEPJF now has in its hands a decision that will not only be legal but profoundly political.