[ad_1]
I have been publishing articles explaining the trials and resources of the Federal Judicial Branch Electoral Tribunal (TEPJF) to resolve conflicts related to elected office and played a role in the historic election on June 2nd.
I will take this opportunity to comment on the challenging way TEPJF has addressed disputes in municipal elections.
Let us remember that on the aforementioned election day, 20,079 local positions were elected throughout the country, including 1,802 municipal chairmen, 1,975 councillors and 14,764 councillors, making this the largest election in the country’s history.
In principle, these electoral conflicts are resolved by local administrative and judicial bodies. However, the challenge chain does not end there, as the TEPJF has to address some of the challenge methods if certain procedural requirements stipulated in the law are met.
It is important to remember that each municipality is governed by a directly elected municipal council, composed of the municipal president and a number of councillors and directors determined by law on the basis of equality. The term of office of the municipal council is three years, and the position may be re-elected for a certain period of time (Article 115, Section 1 of the Federal Constitution).
Article 99 of the Constitution of the Republic gives the TEPJF the power to resolve challenges to clear and firm acts or resolutions of State authorities in organizing and determining the qualifications for elections, or to resolve disputes that arise during elections and that could have a decisive impact on the development of the respective process or on the final outcome of the elections (Section IV).
In this sense, the General Regulations on the System of Election Challenges provide for “election unconstitutionality review trials”, which are precisely the trials that challenge the actions or decisions of the federal entity authorities in organizing and determining the qualifications for local elections (article 86 of the Media Law).
Well, the regional chambers of the TEPJF have the capacity to resolve this trial, depending on the constituency to which they belong within the country. It must be remembered that we have five chambers for this work, located in Mexico City, Guadalajara, Monterrey, Toluca and Jalapa.
To find out which regional chamber of commerce is competent to deal with electoral issues in the municipalities, it is necessary to verify whether the chamber exercises jurisdiction in the area where the alleged violation occurred (Article 87.1 b of the Media Code).
How does the trial take place? After the local electoral court has resolved a dispute concerning a municipal election, the dissident party has four days to challenge the decision. The aforementioned local authorities must receive the documents publicizing the trial and immediately send them to the corresponding TEPJF regional chamber (Articles 8 and 90 of the Media Act).
The Regional Chamber renders the final decision on the trial, with one exception: this decision can be appealed for reconsideration, provided the other admissibility requirements are met. This is the final stage in combating these conflicts.
The review falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the TEPJF Supreme Court (Articles 25 and 61.1 b of the Media Law). The appeal is continued when the decision of the Regional Chamber annuls a norm due to its alleged unconstitutionality and ignores the study of the unconstitutionality complaint due to a direct interpretation of certain provisions of the Constitution and other criteria. The High Chamber’s decision to resolve disputes related to municipal elections has now become final and indisputable.
In this way, the High Court has resolved important cases, such as the annulment of the presidential elections in the city of Ilhatanco, Guerrero, due to gender-based political violence against candidates (SUP-REC-1861/2021), or the allocation of more female candidates in vertical parity in a municipal council composed of an odd number of councillors (SUP-REC-1183/2017).
It also imposes an obligation on local councils to issue regulations to ensure the proper representation of indigenous peoples and communities in municipal councils of federal entities (SUP-REC-588/2018); etc.
Throughout its history, the TEPJF has been able to more than fulfil its constitutional duties, which are aimed at contributing to defusing municipal electoral conflicts. This time is no exception.
Municipalities are the political cells closest to the people’s daily lives, which further emphasizes the institutional responsibility of the court. TEPJF will once again meet the democratic expectations of Mexican society.
* TEPJF Election Judge
[ad_2]
Source link
