Previous 5 / 36 Next

término de 24 horas que establece el Art. 4.001 de la Ley Electoral, 16 LPRA sec. 4031, para notificar un recurso de revisión. Señaló que la CEE notificó la Resolución Enmendada que se pretende revisar el 26 de octubre de 2016 a las 9:07 p.m. y que el Comisionado Electoral del PNP presentó su recurso de revisión oportunamente, el 27 de octubre de 2016 a las 12:57 p.m. Sin embargo, indicó que este último notificó su recurso a la CEE fuera del término aplicable y que el PPD no fue notificado.[2] Por su parte, el Comisionado Electoral del PNP presentó una Moción en Oposición a Desestimación y Acreditando Notificación del Comisionado Electoral del PNP. Alegó que el Comisionado Electoral del PPD se sometió voluntariamente a la jurisdicción en el foro primario. Asimismo, sostuvo que el término de 24 horas para presentar el recurso comenzó a transcurrir el 27 de octubre de 2016 a las 9:07 p.m. porque, según las Reglas de Procedimiento Civil, 32 LPRA Ap. V, no contaba “el día en que se realiza el acto, evento o incumplimiento después del cual el término fijado empieza a transcurrir”. Regla 68.1 de Procedimiento Civil, supra. El Art. 4.001 de la Ley Electoral, 16 LPRA sec. 4031, provee, sin ambages, que la parte que interese revisar un dictamen de la CEE tendrá un término de 24 horas para presentar el recurso de revisión y notificarle a la CEE y a las partes afectadas.[3] Lo anterior es un requisito estatutario para perfeccionar el recurso de revisión. Por tanto, su incumplimiento priva de jurisdicción al tribunal. En su oposición a la desestimación solicitada, el Comisionado Electoral del PNP aceptó que no notificó su escrito a la CEE o a las demás partes dentro del término de 24 horas exigido por el estatuto, sino el 28 de octubre de 2016, entre 9:30 a.m. a 10:00 a.m. Ante tal admisión, la falta de jurisdicción resulta patente y el curso legal obligado era la desestimación. “[L]os entes adjudicativos tienen que ser celosos guardianes de su jurisdicción y no poseen discreción para asumirla en aquellas circunstancias en que no la

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