On June 1, 2025, Mexico embarked on an ambitious electoral journey, holding its inaugural simultaneous elections for over 2,600 judicial positions, including coveted seats in the Supreme Court. This initiative, spearheaded by the Morena government, was ostensibly designed to enhance transparency and accountability within the judiciary. However, the actual turnout told a different story—an alarming participation rate of merely 11% for local elections and 13% for federal contests.
This dismal voter engagement has inevitably raised eyebrows regarding the legitimacy and representativeness of the new judges, prompting a broader discourse about the health of Mexican democracy.
Amidst this backdrop, the election of Silvia Rocío Delgado García as a criminal court judge in Chihuahua’s Bravos Judicial District has ignited a wildfire of criticism and concern across the nation.
Silvia Delgado García, exabogada de Joaquín el Chapo Guzmán ganó las elecciones del poder judicial en Chihuahua, ella entre otros candidatos habían sido cuestionados por sus presuntos vínculos con el crimen organizado o con iglesias como La Luz del Mundo.https://t.co/p9NyLF8Itc
— Educa Oaxaca @educaoaxaca.bsky.social (@laminuta) June 19, 2025
Delgado, famously known for her role in defending Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, the notorious head of the Sinaloa Cartel, secured 23,605 votes, placing her second among candidates and earning her a nine-year term within the state’s judicial framework. Her ascent, set against the backdrop of a controversial judicial reform championed by the Morena party, has cast a pall over the integrity of the judicial system and raised serious alarms about the potential infiltration of organized crime into Mexican institutions.
Silvia Delgado abogada del Chapo va a ser jueza penal en Chihuahua.
Tienen que impugnar estas elecciones no podemos estar en manos de esa gente. pic.twitter.com/Jj7TcAGBPz— Karla Hodoyán (@kahoca) June 19, 2025
A Past Linked to Drug Trafficking
At 51, Silvia Rocío Delgado García boasts an impressive academic resume, having earned her law degree from the Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez (UACJ), a master’s in Amparo from the University of Durango, and a specialization in Mediation from the Superior Court of Justice of Chihuahua. Between 2016 and 2017, she was part of Guzmán’s legal defense team during his imprisonment, where she vocally criticized the conditions of his confinement and alleged mistreatment, as reported by Zeta.
In a Deutsche Welle documentary, Delgado described Guzmán’s trial in the U.S. as a “farce,” claiming he “did not receive a fair trial.” Such declarations have fueled skepticism regarding her impartiality.
Organizations like Defensorxs and Projuc have flagged her candidacy as “highly risky,” asserting that her connections to one of the world’s most infamous drug traffickers compromise the constitutional mandate of possessing a “good reputation” for judicial office.
The Judicial Election: A Process Under Scrutiny
The judicial elections of June 1, 2025, were a product of constitutional reforms enacted in 2024, which introduced popular voting for judges and magistrates. In the Bravos District, voters selected judges for 83 positions, including 49 for criminal court, seven of which were specifically for drug-related cases. Delgado competed against nine candidates—five men and five women—and her second-place finish came amidst a disconcertingly low turnout of 11% locally and 13% federally.
This lack of engagement has emerged as a central criticism of the judicial reform, alongside questions about the adequacy of mechanisms to vet candidate suitability. Miguel Meza, president of Defensorxs, criticized the National Electoral Institute (INE) for “de facto erasing” the good reputation requirement by allowing Delgado and other controversial candidates to participate. The organization has lodged complaints against at least 20 elected candidates, seeking to overturn their elections.
Delgado’s Response to Criticism
In her defense during the campaign, Delgado argued that her experience as a criminal defense lawyer, including her representation of “El Chapo,” equips her with the “character and strength” necessary to uphold justice. She claimed, “They speak from ignorance; my fellow lawyers know I am a person of impeccable conduct.” On social media, she emphasized her academic credentials and commitment to justice, distributing flyers throughout Ciudad Juárez.
In debates organized by the State Electoral Institute (IEE), Delgado championed the judicial reform, contending that electing judges by popular vote prevents them from issuing rulings solely to “protect their position.” She proposed regular reviews of judicial performance and a professional career service for future candidates, pledging to base her decisions on “the facts and applicable law” to ensure impartiality.
In the same election, Hortencia García Rodríguez, who previously ordered the release of former governor César Duarte—accused of corruption—was elected to the Superior Court of Justice with 88,920 votes. Likewise, Yadira Anette Gramer Quiñónez, a legal advisor to PAN Governor María Eugenia Campos, was appointed to the Disciplinary Court. These results have further fueled suspicions regarding political influence in the process.
The election of Silvia Rocío Delgado García as a criminal court judge in Chihuahua exemplifies the inherent risks associated with a poorly conceived judicial reform. The notion that a former attorney for “El Chapo” will now oversee hearings, including those related to drug trafficking, in a region plagued by organized crime is nothing short of alarming.
Justice ought to be more than a populist project or a political chess game. Mexico requires an independent, professional, and ethically robust judicial system—one that is impervious to the influences of organized crime and partisan interests.
About The Author
