International Union of Magistrates expels Conatrib for supporting judicial reform

The International Union of Judges expelled Mexico's National Commission of Higher Courts (Conatrib) for supporting a judicial reform, citing violations of principles of independence and political neutrality required of its members. The decision was announced on October 17, 2026, during the 68th annual meeting of the organization. The expulsion followed Conatrib’s endorsement of Mexico’s controversial judicial reform introduced in 2024. This reform, promoted by the executive branch, led to the removal of judges, magistrates, and ministers. In a statement dated June 28, 2024, Conatrib supported the constitutional modification, which introduced the election of judges through public voting. The commission requested the implementation of this change to be gradual, allowing participation from judges currently in office while respecting judicial independence. In August 2024, the UIM Presidency Committee issued a warning stating that public elections contradict merit-based appointments and undermine judicial immunities, defined as protections ensuring judges remain in their positions unless unjustified. After a review process, Conatrib submitted a report on June 30, 2025, arguing the reform stemmed from popular sovereignty, emphasizing the association’s apolitical stance and efforts to ensure a gradual application of the reform through dialogue with the executive and legislative branches. Two rapporteurs appointed by the UIM, representatives from Spain and Argentina, concluded that Conatrib’s response did not address the core issue, noting that endorsing public elections for judges endorsed a mechanism contrary to the independence and political neutrality required. They recommended submitting the expulsion to a vote. During discussions prior to the vote, representatives from judicial associations in France, Argentina, Chile, and Costa Rica questioned the Mexican delegation about measures taken to defend judicial autonomy. Argentine judge Marcelo Gallo Tagle, former president of the Latin American Federation of Judges (FLAM), challenged Conatrib’s position, stating that defending judicial independence does not allow negotiations: either it is defended or it isn’t. He argued that the Mexican organization should have opposed the removal of judges instead of issuing a document that supported the constitutional change, presenting it as a negotiation.