Previous 4 / 36 Next

Este Tribunal está llamado a proteger la primacía de la ley que en este caso se reduce a los mecanismos diseñados para garantizar la integridad de los procesos electorales en aras de evitar que el ejercicio del sufragio se convierta en una farsa donde se distorsione el ejercicio válido de la mayoría de los electores. Lo contrario sería un grave peligro para las instituciones democráticas. En atención a los hechos específicos del caso ante nuestra consideración, los cuales una mayoría ignora por completo, disiento. I. De entrada, cabe destacar que este Tribunal no tiene jurisdicción para evaluar los méritos del recurso. El 27 de octubre de 2016, el Lcdo. Aníbal Vega Borges, Comisionado Electoral del Partido Nuevo Progresista (Comisionado Electoral del PNP), presentó ante el Tribunal de Primera Instancia un Urgente Recurso de Revisión Electoral, Caso Civil Núm. SJ2016CV00290.[1] Solicitó la revisión de la Resolución Enmendada CEE-RS-16-83 de 26 de octubre de 2016 sobre Solicitudes Voto Adelantado de Electores con Impedimento (encamados) emitida por la Presidenta de la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones, la Lcda. Liza M. García Vélez (CEE), y notificada el 27 de octubre de 2016 a las 9:07 p.m. Asimismo, el 28 de octubre de 2016, presentó ante este foro un Recurso de Certificación Intrajurisdiccional y una Moción Urgente en Auxilio de Jurisdicción. Nos solicitó que certificáramos el caso y lo consolidáramos con el caso Guillermo San Antonio Acha v. CEE y otros, SJ2016CV00289, por impugnarse en ambos la misma resolución emitida por la CEE. Luego de que el foro primario consolidara ambos casos, emitimos una Resolución y certificamos dicho asunto. El 29 de octubre de 2016, el Lcdo. Guillermo San Antonio Acha, Comisionado Electoral del Partido Popular Democrático (Comisionado Electoral del PPD), presentó ante este Tribunal una Moción Urgente de Desestimación por Falta de Jurisdicción del Tribunal y, en la alternativa, solicitud de orden aclaratoria sobre consolidación. En síntesis, alegó que carecíamos de jurisdicción para resolver la controversia en cuestión porque el Comisionado Electoral del PNP incumplió con el

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

San Antonio Acha v. García Vélez

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission (CEE) violated the due process rights of voters with mobility impairments by denying their early voting applications (voto adelantado) based on alleged deficiencies in their forms — including missing signatures, incomplete information, and suspected fraud (e.g., dozens of applications certified by the same physician on the same date) — while simultaneously failing to provide timely notice of those denials, thereby depriving the voters of any meaningful opportunity to cure the defects before the November 8, 2016 general election.

Alleged Acts: The controversy arose during the evaluation of early voting applications (voto adelantado) for voters with mobility impairments ahead of the November 8, 2016 general elections in Puerto Rico. Under Puerto Rico's electoral law, registered voters who suffer from a condition that impedes their mobility and prevents them from going to their assigned polling places on election day may request early voting — including "at-home" early voting for bedridden voters (encamados). The request requires medical certification of the mobility impairment. The State Elections Commission (Comisión Estatal de Elecciones, or "CEE"), presided over by defendant García Vélez, had initiated a process through which at least 10,000 Puerto Rican citizens were granted access to early voting due to mobility impediments. However, 788 of these applications were challenged before the CEE due to alleged defects.

Procedural history: On October 28, 2016 — just days before the November 8 general election — the Electoral Commissioner of the Partido Nuevo Progresista (PNP) petitioned the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico to review the CEE's denials, asking the Court to authorize the hundreds of denied early voting applications for persons with mobility impairments.

Summary: In the weeks leading up to the November 8, 2016 general elections in Puerto Rico, the State Elections Commission (CEE) processed over 10,000 applications for early voting from voters with mobility impairments who were unable to go to their assigned polling places on election day. The CEE identified 788 applications as potentially defective. However, the CEE sent the denial notices late to the affected voters, giving them no meaningful opportunity to respond to the alleged defects or to cure the deficiencies before the election.

Conclusion: The Court ruled that the CEE's late notification of its denial resolution violated the due process rights of disabled voters, and as a remedy, validated all of the challenged early voting applications, thereby allowing the hundreds of voters with mobility impairments to cast their ballots in the November 8, 2016 general election.

Legal Issue(s)

Accessibility
Voter Registration
Voters' Rights

Applicable Law(s): Puerto Rico Constitution, Article II, § 7, and Puerto Rico Electoral Law

Region: Americas

Country: Puerto Rico

Language of Decision

Spanish

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Nov 4, 2016

Geolocation

Latitude: 18.4578

Longitude: -66.0863

: Geolocation

Link: https://www.lexjuris.com/LexJuris/tspr2016/lexj2016227a.htm

Primary Documents

San Antonio Acha v. García Vélez.pdf
Spanish
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

San Antonio Acha v. García Vélez

Primary Documents

Notifications