Skip to content
Afinidad Política

🏛️ Issue

Institutions and corruption: what each party thinks

By Fadrique Garcia Font ·

Bringing back autonomous bodies for transparency and competition, banning relatives from succeeding officeholders as early as 2027 and removing immunity from deputies and senators.

3 questions, 24 party positions and 2 complete disagreements (how they are assigned).

Further reading on this topic: «Mexico’s parties and institutions: watchdogs, nepotism, immunity».

What divides the parties on this issue

Each question in this theme draws a different map. Only the one on autonomous bodies shows the classic split. In November 2024 the coalition groups voted, without a single defection, for the reform that abolished the INAI and Cofece and moved their work into government offices, and today all three firmly reject bringing them back; the PAN, the PRI and Movimiento Ciudadano voted no and defend such bodies' independence, as does SOMOS, which proposes restoring them. PAZ, which lacks documents on the rest of this theme, has them here: its program backs technical and budgetary independence for oversight bodies, which puts it on the opposition's side, one step short of the top.

Electoral nepotism separates Morena from its allies. The 2025 amendment bars a relative from inheriting the office of whoever holds it, but only from 2030. Morena voted for that timetable and then, in May 2025, its National Council imposed the ban on its own candidates for 2027, so it agrees with bringing the date forward. The PVEM, which demanded 2030 in exchange for its vote, flatly rejects moving it up; the PT objects too, less firmly: it reserved the right to field relatives in 2027, arguing that each party decides for itself. The opposition asked for the earlier date: Movimiento Ciudadano voted against pushing it to 2030, while the PAN and the PRI ended up voting for the text as written.

Immunity mixes the blocs differently. The PAN is the most emphatic: its leader wrote in 2025 that a law to remove it was needed. Morena, the PT and Movimiento Ciudadano agree: Morena says it opposes immunity, though it withdrew its own bill and that same year its group blocked a request to strip a deputy of it; most of the PT voted against that ruling, and Movimiento Ciudadano demands that the deputy face the courts. The PRI breaks with its opposition partners: it voted as a bloc for the ruling, and its documents do not propose ending the protection. The PVEM sits in the middle, between a senator who called for abolishing it and a bench that also voted to block that case.

Estimates cover just four positions, SOMOS's and PAZ's on nepotism and immunity, since neither party has a platform before January 2027.

Written from the documented positions of the eight parties on the questions in this issue; where part of it rests on estimated positions, that is stated. It does not include the answers of people taking the test.

What each party proposes on this issue

A summary of their positions on the questions in this issue, based on their electoral platforms, founding documents, votes in the Chamber of Deputies and public statements. The numbers refer to the questions below, each with its details and sources.

PAN

Agrees: 1, 2, 3

PRI

Agrees: 1, 2

Disagrees: 3

PVEM

Disagrees: 1, 2

In between: 3

PT

Agrees: 3

Disagrees: 1, 2

MC

Agrees: 1, 2, 3

Morena

Agrees: 2, 3

Disagrees: 1

PAZ

Agrees: 1, 3

In between: 2

SOMOS

Agrees: 1, 2, 3

1. Autonomous bodies, independent from the government, should be restored for transparency and economic competition.

In November 2024 the Chamber passed the “organic simplification” reform, which abolished autonomous bodies such as the INAI (transparency) and Cofece (competition); their functions passed to government agencies.

Of the 8 parties with a position on this question: 5 in favor, 0 in between and 3 against.

2. The ban on relatives succeeding an officeholder should already apply in the 2027 elections, not from 2030.

The constitutional reform passed by the Chamber in March 2025 bans relatives from succeeding the person who holds an office (so-called electoral nepotism), but only from the 2030 elections.

Of the 8 parties with a position on this question: 5 in favor, 1 in between and 2 against.

3. Deputies and senators should not have immunity: prosecutors should be able to take them before a judge without the Chamber's permission.

Before criminal proceedings can go ahead against a deputy or a senator, the Chamber of Deputies must first approve a “declaration of admissibility”, known as lifting immunity. That protection is called the fuero.

Of the 8 parties with a position on this question: 6 in favor, 1 in between and 1 against.

Explore other issues

🛡️ Security and armed forces ⚖️ Justice and the judiciary 🗳️ Elections and parties 💰 Economy and taxes 👷 Work and pensions 🏥 Health and social programs 🎓 Education, children and family ⚡ Energy and environment 🌾 Water, farming and indigenous peoples 🌎 United States, trade and migration 📜 Rights and freedoms

Who do you agree with on this issue?

The questions in this issue are part of the full test. On 2 of them the parties hold opposite positions, so your answer matters.

Take the political test