Meritocracy and its Impact on Justice as a Tool for Overcoming Corruption

Abstract

This research analyzes the manner in which the current system of appointing justice administrators through popular elections has significantly transformed the traditional scheme of checks and balances, creating a direct dependency on the Legislative branch that weakens both the perception and reality of judicial independence. This phenomenon creates openings for political manipulation and corruption, issues that have been widely recognized and denounced within the national context. The study proposes meritocracy as a necessary alternative to confront and mitigate the corruption that undermines public confidence in the justice system. The review of comparative models reveals that various contexts have implemented systems based on continuous training and rigorous evaluations of judicial operators, including specialized periodic assessments administered by legal professionals and related fields. These processes encompass theoretical knowledge, practical skills, and psychological evaluations designed to measure ethical conduct, fundamental principles, and values. The purpose is to ensure that access to the judiciary responds to merit and suitability criteria, eliminating electoral decisions or political appointments conditioned by external interests. The central hypothesis sustains that a judicial system grounded in meritocracy, transparency, job stability, and fair promotions strengthens independence, reduces corruption, and restores legitimacy and public trust.