Mexico has a history and tradition of constitutionalism, Mexico was born to independent life with the constitution of Apatzingan in 1814 promoted by Jose Maria Morelos y Pavon in the congress of Chilpancingo just 3 years after Miguel Hidalgo had given the cry of Dolores in 1810, which is an indicator of how it took root in the culture of Mexico and has survived until now this belief in the constitution to have a magna carta that not only establishes the organization of the state but also the rights of citizens, our constitutional tradition began when the war of independence had not yet concluded and Morelos was already calling the constituent congress in Chilpancingo to give us a constitution, a constitution that had the merit of establishing a concept of sovereignty that to this day has not been surpassed, a very clear concept of sovereignty, Morelos was the insurgent who most empathized with the Russian ideas of popular sovereignty and they were embodied from the feelings of the nation in the declaration of independence and, of course in the constitution of 1824 where he also established for the first time the principle of Montesquieu, the division of powers and the principle that none should meet in more than one person per population. Mexico was born to independent life with a constitution, the constitution of Apatzingán was ephemeral because it had no application since during a war of independence it was difficult to apply that carta magna.
We have the constitution of Apatzingán, the constitution of 1824, the constitution of 1857 and the constitution of 1917, which have been the four federalist constitutions, if we add to that the organic bases and the laws of Santa Ana, which are totally centralist, we get to accumulate a total of six constitutions in the history of Mexican constitutionalism, It has been a history of ups and downs, after the constitution of Apatzingán comes the constitution of 24, already a constituent congress that is convened in Mexico City, where the debates on the form of government that was to prevail in the independent Mexico, a centralized form of monarchical court of Spanish belief or a republican form of federalist court.
In the 1917 Constitution, all popularly elected positions are directly elected by popular vote, the president of the republic, deputies, senators. The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation also had a stage of election that fortunately did not prosper because subjecting the elected ministers of the court to a type of election like the other popularly elected positions would politicize the court and would then affect its function of being the defender and interpreter of the constitution. The commissions could investigate human rights violations and issue recommendations to state organs, but they had a great political impact because for the first time the CNDH with Jorge Carpizo issued a recommendation to the army, it was a battle that took place in that period. They did have an impact because the recommendations were made public. When the recommendations were not complied with, in the report before the President of the Republic and the other powers that they rendered annually, it said it, all these recommendations were complied with and which were not complied with. During the period of President Zedillo a very important reform took place in which thanks to the Radilla case of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission in Washington, it caused a great impact, the first constitutional article was reformed to establish a fundamental principle in human rights, the principle that all administrative and jurisdictional authorities at all levels have the obligation to apply the international treaties on human rights.
In Mexico the legislative power is the one that can update the constitution, there have been around 700 reforms to date. If a new constitution would guarantee that we would have a sharper, clearer text and that the mentality of reformism would end, it would be ideal, but by having a new constitution we would also be reforming and it would be a never-ending story.