Héctor Ulises Orduña, the alleged sex offender who was elected a federal judge from prison

Héctor Ulises Orduña’s campaign lasted less than a week. On March 30, when Mexico’s National Electoral Institute (INE) signaled the start of the June 1 judicial elections, the candidate for district judge in Veracruz introduced himself in a promotional video: “I’m not the same. I’m a different judge, a decent man, close to the people. So that justice reaches everyone, vote.”

Four days later, he recorded himself riding a moving motorcycle, complaining that his TikTok account had been blocked. “That black hand for the judicial campaign is weak. By the way, they already gave me my number, I’m number 24, I’m going to get my flyers made,” he said at the time.

He didn’t have the opportunity. On April 5, the state prosecutor’s office arrested him on charges of the sexual abuse of minors and incapacitated persons. The following day, he was remanded in pretrial detention, and the agency detailed that he was also linked to child pornography cases in the United States. Orduña had been in prison for two months when he won, by just 44,000 votes, his position as a federal judge.

Orduña’s case is the focus of all the fears of those who criticized the irresponsible conduct of the evaluation committees of the three branches of government, which approved many candidates who would not have passed stricter or more thorough scrutiny. Orduña’s candidacy was approved by the executive branch committee, the most lax of the three. On March 11, he wrote on his X account: “Vote June 1, Plan C is on” — a reference to the name former Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador used for his operation to advance judicial reform through massive support for his party at the polls.

National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) jurist Javier Martín Reyes rules out the possibility that this was done intentionally. Rather, he says, it illustrates once again the consequences of work that was lax. “Everything slipped through the net,” he summarizes: “If they had done a more serious review, it very likely could have been detected.”

The events for which the elected judge is being accused occurred in September 2021, at a clinic in Poza Rica, a municipality in the north of Veracruz. During a visit to a relative, Orduña allegedly groped his underage niece, whom he also forced to watch explicit videos of him and his partner.

The matter is further compounded by ongoing child pornography investigations in the United States, in which the Veracruz Prosecutor’s Office has implicated him, although it has not disclosed specific details. The then-candidate was arrested in relation to the incident five days after beginning his campaign, yet two months later, he nevertheless secured a judicial post — despite not being eligible to vote for it himself.

“Nobody won these elections because of their campaigns,” explains Martín Reyes. “There are people who ran very good, very creative campaigns with good messages, but the one who played the role of the Executive branch won here.” In this Veracruz district, where five seats were up for grabs in mixed elections, the first winning candidate, also nominated by the executive branch, won by 81,000 votes. Orduña, the second and last male candidate to win the position, won by 44,221 votes, very close to the next competitor, who finished 1,200 votes behind.

Orduña’s victory also illustrates what various civil organizations and experts pointed out when they called on citizens to vote: that the future judges would be elected by very few ballots—especially male candidates, whose lists were more competitive than those of their female counterparts.

Orduña won with the support of 1.03% of voters who turned out, 1.75% if only valid votes are taken into account. A minuscule percentage that put him just three hundredths of a point ahead of the next candidate, who was eliminated. He achieved this despite the abuse allegations, despite being unable to campaign, and despite running the race from prison.

The profile the lawyer provided to the INE, along with his resume and proposals, does not paint a picture of a particularly suitable candidate even in technical terms. His vision of the judicial role and the administration of justice — as well as the measures he promises to implement — is riddled with spelling mistakes. As for the content, his proposals include requiring elected judges to undergo a polygraph test every two years.

With the voting over and the seat already assigned, the electoral body must now analyze whether or not to invalidate Orduña’s victory and other similar cases. The criterion known as “8 out of 8″ against gender violence allows the INE to do so in cases involving final convictions for such offenses. However, it remains unclear what action will be taken in cases where there are no convictions or trials yet, or with candidates — now elected judges — whose nominations were challenged for failing to meet suitability criteria that are more loosely interpreted.

Intense social and political pressure suggests that some of these victories will be overturned. What remains to be seen is where the line of tolerance will ultimately be drawn. With both the evaluation committee and the electorate having failed to serve as effective filters, the INE now stands as the final firewall between these candidates and the bench.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition