**From El Chapo's Defense to Judicial Aspirations: Silvia Delgado's Unconventional Campaign**

*Delgado's candidacy raises eyebrows as she seeks to become a penal judge in a groundbreaking election that aims to empower voters in choosing the nation's judiciary, but her past ties to organized crime cast a shadow over her ambitions.*

**
In the bustling streets of Ciudad Juárez, Silvia Delgado is making her presence known as she campaigns for a penal judge position, distributing leaflets with a bright smile amidst traffic congestion. “I’m standing for penal judge,” she cheerfully announces, urging voters to select number 12 on the ballot for the first direct election of the entire Mexican judiciary. However, the former defense attorney for infamous drug lord Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán is not your typical candidate.

Unlike her peers, Delgado’s campaign materials notably omit any mention of her most infamous client, whose legacy as head of the Sinaloa Cartel remains a point of public concern. Critics argue that her previous role defending one of the world's most notorious criminals should disqualify her from holding a judicial office. In response, Delgado firmly defends her professional choices, asserting, “Why should it? For doing my job? For defending people’s individual guarantees?”

While she has not been charged or implicated in any criminal activities tied to her defense of Guzmán, a leading human rights organization, Defensorxs, has labelled her a “high-risk candidate,” alongside individuals with documented connections to drug trafficking and violence against journalists. The organization’s director, Miguel Alfonso Meza, expressed concerns over the potential conflicts of interest posing threats to the legitimacy of Mexico’s justice system, suggesting that prior affiliations with drug cartels could lead to pressures on candidates once in office.

Delgado refutes assertions by Defensorxs that her career could be compromised due to her past, challenging any evidence to support claims of receiving illicit payments as she declares her identity as a professional attorney. “I received normal monthly payments, like any lawyer,” she insists, dismissing allegations with conviction.

As the country prepares to fill over 7,500 judicial positions through direct election, the reform has ignited protests from law students and legal personnel who criticize the potential for politicizing an independent judicial system. This modification has sparked a heated debate around its implications for justice and accountability, with Meza pointing to concerns that judges may forge alliances with political figures to secure electoral support.

Despite the controversies, some candidates view the shift as an opportunity towards a more representative justice system. Olivia Aguirre Bonilla, another contender for the Supreme Court, emphasizes the chance for reform through community engagement, echoing sentiments that the judicial elite's removal would lead to genuine representation.

As voters prepare to head to the polls, Delgado remains determined, advocating for her professional background while navigating an election that could redefine the relationships between politics and the judiciary in Mexico. Her campaign underscores the broader conversation on justice and power, especially in a nation grappling with the impacts of organized crime on its governance and legal integrity. The turnout in these elections will be pivotal in determining whether voters embrace change in Mexico’s judicial framework or remain skeptical of candidates shaped by controversial histories.*