On 27 February, 29 cartel leaders and members (most, Mexican nationals), wanted in the United States for crimes such as money laundering, drug trafficking and organized crime were transferred to that country, bypassing the extradition process. According to the Mexican Attorney General (AG) and the federal Security and Citizen Protection Minister, the cartel leaders were ‘sent’ or ‘transferred’, pursuant to Mexico’s National Security Law and article 89 of the Constitution. The officials clarified the cartel leaders had not been extradited, but transferred following a decision of the National Security Council in response to a U.S. request. They defended this procedure, blaming corruption in the judiciary for the delay in resolving extradition requests, given that injunctions and appeals meant that some cases had been ongoing for many years. The decision is atypical, both for the legal basis invoked and Mexico’s long-established demand that any nationals subject to extradition requests are spared the death penalty. Although the AG asserted that capital punishment would not be pursued in the criminal cases, U.S. prosecutors have not given such assurances publicly.  

 Sources: : Gobierno de Mexico, Expansion Politica, El Pais, Reuters, NY Times, El Universal

On 15 January, the Federal Judiciary’s Electoral Tribunal (TEPJF) upheld the National Electoral Institute’s (INE) decision to exclude Mexicans living abroad from this year’s first ever judicial elections in the country (to take place in June). Although the TEPJF rejected INE’s argument that it was prevented from including migrants in the absence of specific legislation that expressly recognized their rights to vote in judicial elections, it upheld INE’s decision on other grounds. The TEPJF recognized the right of Mexican migrants to vote for members of the Supreme Court, the TEPJF and of the Tribunal of Judicial Discipline, however it reasoned that it is materially impossible to guarantee such rights for the upcoming elections. It decided that the short time-frame to organize these elections, along with the limited budget and resources, would prevent the electoral management body from implementing any modality for voting from abroad. 

Sources: TEPJF, La Jornada, Proceso, Milenio, International IDEA

On 21 December, a series of constitutional amendments backed by the executive entered into force abolishing seven autonomous bodies, including the National Institute for Transparency, Access to Information and Personal Data Protection. The other autonomous institutions had mandates related to evaluation of social development policy, economic competition, telecommunications, education, and energy and hydrocarbon regulation. According to the ruling coalition in Congress and government officials, the amendments aim to simplify bureaucracy, cut costs and corruption; the functions of these bodies will now be distributed and carried out by other ministries and government institutions. Critics and opposition politicians have denounced the amendments, arguing they weaken checks on government, the accountability of public officials, and people’s access to information and privacy rights.

Sources: Diario Oficial de la Federación, El Financiero, El Universal, Reuters   

On 15 November, executive-initiated constitutional amendments on gender equality were promulgated and entered into force the following day. The amendments include an acknowledgment of the State’s duty to ensure substantive gender equality, the inclusion of a gender perspective in public security, the creation of specialized prosecutors’ offices on gender-based violence at the state-level, as well as the implementation of the principle of gender parity in the appointment of heads of ministries at the state-level. Notably, the amendments establish the prohibition of a gender pay-gap. Congress will have to pass implementing legislation or amend existing laws to guarantee the newly codified rights and obligations within 90 days.

Sources: Presidencia de la República, Diario Oficial de la Federación