Previous 14 / 101 Next

SX-JE-3/2021 Y ACUMULADOS 31. En ese contexto, sigue la misma suerte el escrito presentado por quien pretendió comparecer como tercera12, a fin de ofrecer pruebas supervenientes, y que fue previamente reservado, toda vez que posibilidad de ofrecer este tipo de pruebas está reservada a las partes. CUARTO. Causales de improcedencia 32. De la lectura integral a los informes circunstanciados rendidos en los juicios SX-JE-3/2021 y SX-JE-5/2021, se advierte lo siguiente: 33. A su consideración, Carlos Enrique Ucán Yam y Blanca Guadalupe Lizzete Uc Martínez, actores en los presentes juicios federales, equivocaron la vía para controvertir la sentencia emitida por el TEEC, ya que controvierten la sentencia local que los infraccionó por hechos constitutivos de violencia política en razón de género a través del juicio de revisión constitucional electoral. 34. En ese sentido, consideran que no cumple con los requisitos específicos señalados en el artículo 86 la Ley General de Medios. 35. Sin embargo, a consideración de esta Sala resultan ser argumentos ineficaces para desechar las demandas 12 Recibido de manera electrónica el diecinueve de enero del año en curso. 14

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

(Mexico) SX JE 0003 2021

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether there were procedural irregularities in the lower court’s decision based on the timeliness of the complaint and lack of notice by the court. Whether evidence from Facebook and WhatsApp demonstrating gender based political violence were illegally obtained and possess the truth and veracity it asserts.

Alleged Acts: Misogynistic behaviors were expressed through Facebook and WhatsApp by partisan state officials, which violated the human rights of the general secretary of a political party. Plaintiffs raise multiple procedural irregularities with the lower court’s decision. First, it is argued that the complaint was not filed within the four days provided for in the state electoral legislation and, therefore, should have been considered inadmissible because the act was consented to. Second, plaintiffs state that it was not notified of the summons in a personal way; rather, they were notified through social media channels such as Facebook. Third, plaintiffs argue it held an evidentiary hearing without notifying the parties. Finally, plaintiffs assert that the evidence taken into consideration by the local court was obtained unlawfully, violating plaintiff’s right to privacy, in addition to the fact that the proper chain of custody was not kept, nor the technical details of the mobile phone from which they were extracted.

Procedural history: Plaintiff contests the judgment issued by the Electoral Tribunal of the State of Campeche in the trials TEEC/JDC/15/2020 and its accumulated TEEC/JDC/18/2020, which among other issues, determined that members of the State Council of MORENA in Campeche exercised constitutive acts of political violence based on gender against the General Secretary of the party and consequently issued various measures of integral reparation; among them, the registration of the actors in the register of people sanctioned in matters of political violence against women on the basis of gender. Multiple appeals from members of the State Council of Campeche were joined due to each appeal focusing on the same controversy. The Federal Judiciary subsequently upheld the lower court’s ruling.

Summary: This Regional Chamber affirmed the contested sentence because the procedural irregularities alleged by the actors related to the timeliness of the lawsuit, the investigation of the local trial, and the legality of the evidence were unfounded and inoperative. The evidence from Facebook and WhatsApp was not obtained illegally because it was provided by one of the parties involved in the messages. Therefore, there was no constitutional violation to the right of privacy. Similarly, the statements related to the evidentiary value of the messages are unfounded because the principle of reversion—where the burden of proof falls on defendants to disprove the alleged human rights violations—was followed. Moreover, the reprehensible conducts were aimed at affecting the political and electoral rights of the victim due to her status as a woman.

Conclusion: Defendant’s claims were unfounded and inoperative

Legal Issue(s)

Gender

Applicable Law(s): Articles 755-758 of the Law of Institutions and Electoral Procedures for the State of Campeche

Region: Americas

Country: Mexico

Language of Decision

Spanish

Court: Electoral Court

Election Type: Local

Date of decision: Jan 21, 2021

Geolocation

Latitude: 19.43318644

Longitude: -99.13401778

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

SX-JE-0003-2021.pdf
Spanish
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

(Mexico) SX JE 0003 2021

Primary Documents

Notifications