[ad_1]
Mexico City (apro) – Judge Felipe de la Mata will propose to the High Chamber of the Federal Judiciary Electoral Tribunal (TEPJF) to confirm the consent of the General Council of the National Electoral Institute (INE), which gives Morena and his allies a certain majority in the Lower House through the proportional representation system.
It is the first draft sentence the Supreme Court will discuss in resolving one of more than 5,000 challenges to Morena’s overrepresentation in the House of Representatives.
Last week, INE allocated 364 seats in the Chamber of Deputies to Morena, the Workers’ Party and PVEM, which guarantees them a qualified majority “in line with” approving the reforms.
The challenge was addressed by members of the PRI, PNP and PDP, who argued that, when allocating deputies by proportional majority, the NBS General Council did not take into account the seats obtained by the Workers’ Party and the Popular Party from Morena, while the opposition demanded that he obtain more votes to remain in the representation.
“This court is of the view that the allocation in the NEA General Council is correct as it is in compliance with the parameters of representation allocation as provided for in the Constitution and due to the principle of proportional representation, therefore, the adoption of the proposed alternatives is not feasible for the promoters as they translate into unjustified modifications of the said mechanism,” he said.
Furthermore, they said the “steamroller” of Morena and his allies was preventing other MPs from getting the 33% representation needed to handle unconstitutional actions, as a check and balance to approve reforms that could violate Magna Carta.
In this regard, Judge De La Mata pointed out that the INE allocation agreement is not intended to verify whether political parties can handle unconstitutional lawsuits, but to verify those parties that obtain the votes required by law and have a certain number of seats.
“The delegate allocation agreement simply verifies which political parties have reached the threshold to participate in the elections and allocates and distributes the delegates corresponding to each party according to a formula based on the votes it receives.
“Beyond this purpose, the purpose of the apportionment agreement is not to verify whether the number of representatives each party will have may be consistent with other constitutional and legal purposes, such as taking unconstitutional actions,” the project to elect magistrates said.
The opposition parties say that the excess representation limit is improperly applied because increasing the national votes received by each party by eight percentage points would create excessive distortions, which is why they are asking the TEPJF to apply the allocation formula differently to avoid a single bench that would result in overrepresentation.
“It is impossible for this body to interpret the percentage of excess representation (+8%), or the majority strength formula to which it contributes, in the terms proposed by the promoters, because in each case this would mean amending Article 54 of the Constitution in a manner that would be contrary to the principles of certainty and stability of the jurisprudence of this High Court,” he stressed.
The court must resolve all challenges within three days before the new legislature is scheduled to be established on September 1.
However, if the High Court approves Judge Felipe de la Mata’s project, the standard could be replicated in the remaining challenges addressing the same issue.
[ad_2]
Source link
