LESSONS ON GENDER EQUALITY AND WOMEN’S POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT Municipality of Coicoyán de las Flores, this resulted in the denial of an Indigenous woman’s request to run for office. She was told that only party candidate lists headed by men could be registered because “our electoral process has always been carried out in this way in our community.” The Xalapa Regional Chamber found her grievances to be groundless. The Regional Court noted that ensuring gender equality in Indigenous communities “must be guaranteed on the basis of their own internal regulatory system” and held that “in order to consider gender-based acts of discrimination to be accredited, the mere statements of the alleged victim are not enough, but there must also be minimal elements of proof that lead to sustaining that the alleged conduct was in fact based on gender elements.” The plaintiff appealed the decision. Thus, the TEPJF was asked to consider whether Indigenous customs for men to elect political leaders outweigh the principles of non-discrimination, equality and gender parity, as well as the right of “every woman . . . to a life free of violence, both in the public and private spheres” and to “freely and fully exercise their political rights.”38 In a split ruling, the TEPJF ordered the Regional Chamber to reconsider the case utilizing “a gender-based and cross-sectional approach” and “the reversal of the burden of proof established in this ruling” in making its decision. 39 The TEPJF noted that, “although it is true that the Municipality of Coicoyán de las Flores has the collective rights of selfdetermination, self-government, and autonomy to elect its authorities or representatives in accordance with its norms, procedures, institutions, and traditional practices, to do so it must not contravene the fundamental rights and recognized principles in the Federal Constitution.” In short, the tribunal found that, while Indigenous communities do have a right to choose their leaders according to their customs and traditions, that right is not absolute and does not trump Mexico’s constitutional commitment to gender equality. In 2018, the TEPJF considered a case that touched on a range of intersecting issues, including women’s equality, gender identity and Indigenous rights. The judgment in this case reinforced the role of electoral authorities in preventing the misuse of gender quotas for political gain (as seen in the Samoa case) while placing the burden on these authorities to mitigate potential abuses in a way that does not discriminate against women, Indigenous or transgender candidates. In December 2017, the General Council of the Institute for Elections and Citizen Participation of Oaxaca (IEEPCO) approved the guidelines on gender equality to be followed by political parties and other candidates when registering their candidacies. 40 These guidelines established that for nominations from transgender, transsexual, intersex or 38 See Tribunal Electoral [Electoral Tribunal], Judgement, Recurso de Reconsideración [Appeal for Reconsideration] SUP 2020 REC 102 924628 (Sept. 2, 2020), https://electionjudgments.org/en/entity/ulrx721d3dd 39 Id. “[T]he assessment of evidence in cases of gender-based political violence must be carried out with a gender perspective, in which the responsibility of providing what is necessary to prove the facts is not transferred to the victims, in order to prevent a stereotypical interpretation of the evidence, and to pass resolutions without gender considerations, which hinders, on the one hand, the access of women victims to justice and, on the other, the stigma-free vision of women who dare to file a complaint….the defendant, perpetrator, or the counterparty is the one who will have to reliably disprove the non-existence of the facts on which the offense is based.” 40 Resolution IEEPCO-CG-76/2017, https://www.ieepco.org.mx/archivos/acuerdos/2017/IEEPCO-CG- 76:2017.pdf?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=nui 13