LESSONS ON GENDER EQUALITY AND WOMEN’S POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT Muxe people, the candidacies should correspond “to the gender the person identifies with.” 41 Muxes are members of the Zapotec people of Oaxaca born with male sex characteristics and assigned as male at birth but who identify or present as a different gender identity than their birth assignment; some Muxes identify or present as women. 42 In April 2018, IEEPCO approved the registration of 19 candidates who self-identified as both transgender and as members of the Muxe community. All 19 sought to register as women and benefit from the gender quotas in place for legislative and municipal offices. Members of the Muxe community subsequently filed a complaint with IEEPCO, alleging that 17 of the 19 registered candidates were not genuine Muxes but were simply seeking to take advantage of the gender quota. Community representatives noted that some of the candidates were seeking to be re-elected and had not self-identified as Muxes (or women) during their previous candidacy. Additionally, it was alleged that 15 of those 17 candidates had first tried to register as men for the 2018 elections, before then registering as Muxe candidates when they found they could not be placed on the ballot as men. In response to these complaints, the IEEPCO analyzed the claim and, after obtaining evidence on the gender identity with which these 17 candidates conducted themselves socially, opted to cancel the registration in 15 cases, noting in its opinion that these were in fact men who had self-identified as transgender women to successfully register their candidacies. 43 On appeal, the Tribunal considered two issues: 1) what proof the state can demand from an individual to prove his or her gender identity for the purpose of inclusion in the gender quota 44 and 2) what measures the authorities can and should adopt to verify the gender identity of a person to avoid the fraudulent use of gender quotas. With respect to the first question, the TEPJF ruled that it is enough for a potential candidate to inform the respective electoral body of his or her gender identity, and that no additional evidence should be required. However, on the second question, the TEPJF found that, if claims are made that cast doubt on the authenticity of the self-identification, the electoral authority must take measures to protect the electoral rights of women and transgender persons against possible abuse. This takes the burden of proving gender identity away from the individual and places it on the person challenging that identity or on the electoral body registering that candidate. 45 In this case, the TEPJF noted that the Muxe community had provided evidence that 15 of the 17 candidates had tried to register first as men, which cast doubt on the validity of their subsequent self-identification as transgender women. Thus, the TEPJF ruled that these 15 applications were invalid, canceled the registration of those candidacies and ordered the relevant parties to replace them with 15 women. 46 41 Article 16: In the event of a nomination of transgender, transsexual, intersex or Muxe people, the nomination will correspond to the gender the person identifies with and such nomination will be taken into account for the fulfillment of the principle of gender equality. Of which the nominating political party must inform in the registration corresponding to the candidate or candidates in question. 42 Leora Yashari, Life Outside the Binary: Meet Mexico’s Muxe Community Celebrating Genderqueerness (2019), https://theculturetrip.com/north- america/mexico/articles/a-brief-history-of-muxe-mexicos-third-gender 43 IEEPCO-CG-28/2018: http://www.ieepco.org.mx/archivos/acuerdos/2018/ACUERDO IEEPCO-CG-28 2018.pdf. 44 SUP-JDC-304/2018, para 302 (“The essential aspect that must be determined is whether the mere declaration of gender identity is sufficient for the person concerned to be considered as a candidate of the gender to which they claim to belong.”) https://electionjudgments.org/en/entity/492xlz5bgvh 45 See Ellena, Katherine, “Protecting the Political-Electoral Rights of Citizens: An Analysis of the 2018 Muxe Judgment of the Superior Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary of Mexico in SUP-JDC-304/2018” (Forthcoming) 46 Id. 14