Judge’s sentence Anthony Cuevas which gave representation in the plenary session of State Electoral Commission (EEC) of Puerto Rico Independence Party (PIP), Citizen Victory Movement (MVC) and The Dignity Project it would seem to be final and firm, since The New Progressive Party (PNP) I would follow in the footsteps of the president of the body, Francisco Rosado Colomerand would refrain from raising the controversy on appeal.
Deputy Commissioner of La Palma, Vanessa Santo Domingo, stated that it was satisfied that Cuevas had not declared unconstitutional the parties in Electoral code relevant to the rights of parties, but stipulated that, following the results of the last elections, the principles of the previous law should be applied.
“We are satisfied that the parties keep their electoral franchise and participate in the plenary session of the Commission. It’s something the governor (Pedro Pierluisi) stated clearly. Beyond that, part of our satisfaction with the decision is that it does not establish that the Electoral Code is unconstitutional, it was simply a matter of how the retention of these franchises was applied for the next election cycle. The reality is that the president of CEE had to apply the way in which the electoral franchises were retained in accordance with the Electoral Code 2020, and this process in court had to take place in one way or another “, said Santo Domingo.
We recommend:
The 2011 electoral law provided that all parties that had automatically re-registered in the general election would retain their representation before the EEC. However, the new code stipulates that the full EEC will be made up of two to three parts, a provision that Cuevas has decided can only enter into force in 2024.
In their administrative and judicial arguments, both the PNP and the EEC alluded to the cost of representing the five parties in the body as a reasonable reason to prevent PIP, MVC and Proyecto Dignidad from having “proprietary” election commissioners.
According to Rosado Colomer, the annual cost for each match is $ 1.2 million.
“We are worried and it was one of the proposals we made in court. I understand that the court did not take into account or did not give enough importance to the tax crisis we are experiencing in all government agencies, that it was necessary to make some cuts.. However, we must take budgetary measures or request an increase in the budget in order to be able to comply, “said Santo Domingo.
The Deputy Commissioner, on the other hand, suggested that the PNP’s position is for the PIP to be recognized as the “third party” of the EEC, instead of the MVC, which came in third in the candidacy for governor and in the number of full votes in state vote.
“Those parties would have the same rights they had in 2019 and 2020 when they signed up. There are not more, there are not less. That’s what they had at the time, “the lawyer said.
Should the third game be PIP or MVC? Metro.
“We understand that any decision must be taken in accordance with the Electoral Code 2020 and it is controversial that both parties, both PIP and MVC, will have to go to the plenary of the Commission and take the decision in due time. Our position is that the third party must be the one who meets the requirements established in the Electoral Code, so that it can be considered as such “, stressed Santo Domingo.
Of the three “state parties”, only the PIP met the requirement of the new law to nominate candidates for mayor and municipal legislature in at least 39 of the 78 municipalities.
However, both the MVC and the Dignity Project stated that the requirement was impossible to meet, as the Electoral Code became law a few months after the closing date of the candidacies.
An issue that remains to be resolved would be whether the third party would have representation in Standing registration commissions, because the electoral law reduced from three to two the number of communities that make up the institutional balance in those spaces.