Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Together for the Change Without Formalizing Candidacies

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the when there is a vacancy in the candidate list and a legal framework for alternating candidate gender on the ballot, the substitute must be of the same gender as the deceased.

Alleged Acts: On September 1, 2019, a Federal Judge made a list of candidate with particular attention to the number of men and women on the list. After the list was put together, a candidate died. The Judge again reissued the list with a new candidate, the next male candidate on the list. Notably, the first and second alternative candidate were female. Based on the proximity to election, Electoral Board made the request to use the same ballots with the deceased candidate and inform voters that he was replaced by the new substitute candidate.

Procedural history: The petitioners filed suit alleging that the Constitution was designed to provide representation of women and that Federal Judge did not account for that when substituting in another male candidate. Further, the petitioners stated that the implementation of this candidate was “contradictory to the essential purpose of the law that it regulates.”

Summary: The court determined that in the event of death, resignation, or disability the candidate substitutes the next person of the same gender available on the list. However, the list must maintain the same gender alternation requirement required under Article 60.

Conclusion: The court declared the complaint admissible and the framework acceptable consider the gaps in the legal framework.

Legal Issue(s)

Language of Decision

Geolocation

Latitude: -34.709261021321225

Longitude: -59.92459987214423