Previous 15 / 36 Next

debido proceso de ley de los electores al no ser notificados de las apelaciones instadas por los comisionados locales y que la CEE incurrió en incuria. Finalmente, cuestiona las determinaciones de hechos y de derecho de la Comisionada Especial. Por otro lado, los Comisionados Electorales del PPD, el PIP y el PPT presentaron conjuntamente un alegato. Plantean que conceder el remedio que solicita el Comisionado Electoral del PNP permitiría el fraude electoral. Además, reiteran el planteamiento jurisdiccional presentado anteriormente. Por otro lado, acogen las recomendaciones de hechos y de derecho de la Comisionada Especial y sostienen que se debe dar gran deferencia a ésta y a la CEE. Aseguran que el procedimiento cumplió con las garantías del debido proceso de ley y lo establecido en la Ley Electoral y el Manual. Finalmente, concluyen que el Comisionado Electoral del PNP no presentó prueba suficiente para refutar las conclusiones de la CEE. En su alegato, la Presidenta de la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones argumenta que las determinaciones de su Resolución fueron razonables y deben sostenerse. Plantea, en esencia, que la prueba presentada ante la Comisionada Especial demostró que los médicos que atendieron muchas de las solicitudes que revocó no tenían una relación médico-paciente con los electores. Desde su perspectiva, los requisitos establecidos para conceder el voto adelantado a personas encamadas, entre ellos la certificación del médico de cabecera o tratamiento del elector, son válidos y están comprendidos dentro de las facultades de la Asamblea Legislativa y la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones. Estos requisitos, a su juicio, incluyen su interpretación de que un médico de cabecera o tratamiento es solo aquel con una relación médico-paciente con el elector. Por esta razón, solicita que la resolución recurrida sea confirmada. III Evaluados los alegatos de las partes, una mayoría de este Tribunal valida todas las solicitudes de voto adelantado que están ante nuestra consideración. Concluye que la CEE violó el debido proceso de ley de los electores al notificar tardíamente la Resolución Enmendada. Señala que la notificación se realizó el 28 y 29 de octubre de 2016, es decir, dos

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