Judicial reform is the complete or partial politicalreform of a country'sjudiciary. Judicial reform can be connected to alaw reform,constitutional amendment,prison reform, police reform or part of wider reform of the country's political system.[1]
Stated reasons for judicial reform include increasing of theindependence of the judiciary,constitutionalism andseparation of powers, increasedspeed of justice, increasedfairness of justice,[2] improvedimpartiality,[3] and improvingelectoral accountability,political legitimacy andparliamentary sovereignty.[4][5]
Areas of the judicial reform often include: codification of law instead ofcommon law, changing between aninquisitorial system and anadversarial system, changes tocourt administration such asjudicial councils or changes to appointment procedure, establishing mandatory retirement age for judges or increasing the independence ofprosecutors from theexecutive.
The2024 Mexican judicial reform is a series ofconstitutional amendments that restructured thejudiciary of Mexico.[15] The reform replaced Mexico's appointment-based system for selecting judges with one where judges, pre-selected by Congress, are elected by popular vote, with each judge serving a renewable nine-year term. It reduces the number ofSupreme Court justices from 11 to 9 and limits their terms to 12 years. The reform also allows the use of"faceless" judges and establishes a new tribunal for judicial oversight and accountability, while significantly reducing benefits and salaries previously received by members of the judiciary.[16][17] With its passing, Mexico became the first country to have elections for all judges.[18][19]
The reform was put forward by the governing coalition, led by theNational Regeneration Movement (Morena), with the goal of eliminating corruption in the judiciary.[20] It faced significant resistance from opposition political parties, judicial workers, and international organizations, who argued that it threatenedjudicial independence.[21][22] Itsparked nationwide protests and strikes, even leading to thestorming of the Senate on the day of the bill's vote.[23][24]The period from 2012 to 2015 is the period of theLord Presidency ofLord Gill whose agenda was to overhaul and modernise a failing judicial system.[31] His initial Report dated from 2009, and followed a lengthy public consultation. His opinion was that the system as it stood was "outdated, expensive, unpredictable and inefficient."[32] The principal statutory changes were contained in theCourts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014.
The reform of the judiciary which was largely the work of the Minister of Justice Dmitry Zamyatin, his extremely important assistant Serge Zarudny, and several other enlightened officials, proved to be the most successful of the 'great reforms'. Almost overnight it transformed the Russian judiciary from one of the worst to one of the best in the civilized world. / Later the government tried on occasion to influence judges for political reasons, and, what is more important, in its struggle against radicalism and revolution it began to withdraw whole categories of legal eases from the normal procedure of 1864 and to subject them to various forms of the courts martial. But, while the reform of the judiciary could be restricted in application, it could not be undone by the imperial government, and, as far as the reform extended, modem justice replaced arbitrariness and confusion. Russian legal reform followed Western, especially French, models, but, as Kucherov and others have demonstrated, these models were skillfully adapted to Russian needs It might be added that the courts, as well as thezemstvo institutions, acquired political significance, for they served as centers of public interest and enjoyed a somewhat greater freedom of expression than was generally allowed in Russia.
Of no less significance was the judicial reform of 1864, of which Serge Zarudny was the chief promoter. Its basic points were the improvement of court procedure, introduction of the jury system and justices of the peace, and the organization of lawyers into a formal bar. The new courts proved equitable and efficient, and in this respect Russia could be compared favorably with the most progressive European countries. ... Most of the characteristics created by the reforms of Alexander II lasted until 1905, and some until 1917.
