In recent days, voices were heard in defense of the independence of the judiciary, due to questions about the temporary suspension granted by federal judges against enacting so-called “electricity reform”, which should lead us to think about its value for the Federal Judicial Authority. The life of the Republic, as a guarantee of the correct exercise of the judicial function and the validity of the constitutional state of law.
The independence of the judiciary means that there are no external pressures affecting the exercise of the judicial function, so that it can be executed without other powers or any other real factor affecting any matter that is subject to, directs or interferes with the judicial authority. the decision. Which guarantees that judges can carry out their duties with absolute freedom of conscience and legal reasoning, taking into account the principles that guide the Constitution and the laws emanating from it.
Hence, the principle of division of powers and independence of the judiciary is a basic pillar of the republic and the constitutional state of law, whereby the authorities are subject to the constitution that defines their powers and powers, while the judicial authority is responsible for being safe for balance and ensuring submission to its competencies.
For this reason, our constitution orders the division of the supreme power of the Federation to exercise it into legislative, executive and judicial power, which may not be consolidated into a single person or company.
Likewise, it also defines the principles of the judicial profession by which independence as president of the university is formed, whereby a judge cannot be imagined to be neutral, objective or professional, and even less to behave with distinction if he does not have this essential characteristic that he is nothing more than the freedom to exercise the function in a rational manner And legal, without interference of interests other than unrestricted compliance with the law and constitutional principles. Without independence, the judge loses the necessary impartiality that the job inherently requires.
It has been confirmed by international bodies such as the United Nations Assembly Basic principles relating to the independence of the judiciary, States that the independence of the judiciary must be guaranteed by the state and declared by the constitution, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has recognized the accused as The right to an independent judge, From this emanates the obligation to prosecute “only in accordance with” the law, “and the duty of public authorities to refrain from unjustified interference either in the judicial authority or in the person of the designated judge.
These are the reasons for reaffirming the independence of the judiciary and its judges. Independence, which does not mean absolute authority, is related to the principle of the responsibility of judges and the existence of legal channels to challenge their decisions, when they are considered in violation of the constitution and the law.
The federal judiciary is tasked with defending the constitution and achieving a balance of powers, a responsibility that requires protection of the independence and independence of federal judges.
For this reason, Karl Lowenstein – considered the father of modern constitutionalism – noted that “the independence of judges in exercising the functions entrusted to them and their liberation from all sorts of authority constitutes the cornerstone of the building … the state of democratic constitutional law.”
Today – as always – it is necessary to preserve the independence of the judiciary and its judges in the country, as it is the backbone of the democratic rule of law.
Minister of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
“Award-winning zombie scholar. Music practitioner. Food expert. Troublemaker.”