Although a panel of the Court of Appeal return controversy over election to mayor of San Juan in ‘ Court of First Instance, The resumption of the process in this forum would be stopped if the mayor Miguel Romero request review at Supreme Court, As he anticipated yesterday that he would.
The former president of the Bar Association Arturo Hernández emphasize that, at this stage, the Supreme Court would only have before it the jurisdictional dispute, precisely the matter on which the panel composed of the appellate judges Fernando Bonilla Ortiz, Nereida Cortés González i Olga Birriel Cardona revoke, in a divided decision, the superior judge Anthony Cuevas.
On January 29, Cuevas determined that the legal representation of Manuel Natal, Aspirant of the Citizen Victory Movement (MVC), Had failed to place Romero within five days of the filing of the lawsuit, but magistrates Bonilla Ortiz and Cortés González interpreted that the electoral law stipulates a special procedure that does not require an ordinary location, but the court assumes jurisdiction once the contested candidate receives a copy of the appeal questioning the election result.
This notification, according to court documents, occurred on January 17, three days after Natal filed his challenge to the election, in which he requests, as a remedy to the alleged fraud that occurred in general scrutiny, a new ballot among early and absent voters.
Romero, in his motions for dismissal, argued that it was not until January 21 – seven days after the challenge was filed – that Natal’s representatives handed over a location to the legal affairs office in the municipality of Sant Joan, but the Appellant did not resolve this point to consider-academic.
Hernandez recalled that the Supreme Court has not yet had to interpret the provisions contained in the Article 10.15 of the new Electoral code, Which governs the appeal process and forms the basis of this jurisdictional dispute.
“Any Candidate who challenges the election of another, must appear before the judge in the Chamber of the Judicial Region of San Juan designated in accordance with Chapter XIII of this Law, and within the following ten (10) days on the date of notification of the certification of election for each elective public office in the general scrutiny, a written statement, stating under oath the reasons on which its challenge is based, which must be of such a nature that, if proven If so, it would be sufficient to change the result of the election.A faithful and accurate copy of the writ of challenge will be served on the challenged Candidate and will be delivered in person, within five (5) days of the its submission “, indicates the text of the controversial statute, by providing that the challenged candidate must submit a response” within ten (10) days following the date on which he receives notification “of the challenge.
“The notification, writing and answering prescribed in this Law, may be processed by any person competent to testify and will be processed by personal delivery to the respective parties, their electoral representatives, in accordance with the rules of civil procedure or in the residence or office of the person to whom they are addressed “, adds Article 10.15.
In the judgment, the Court of Appeals held that “a close analysis of Article 10.15 reveals that the legislature omitted the use of the term location and, instead, refers to the notification of the writ of challenge by personal delivery of the same “.
On the arguments that the Supreme Court would consider to resolve the jurisdictional controversy, and given the lack of local jurisprudence “in electoral matters,” Hernandez stated that “it would probably be necessary (to analyze opinions of) another jurisdiction. correspond “.
While the rules of civil procedure allow 30 days to go to the Supreme Court with an appeal certiorari, Romero must do so long before, said Hernandez, if he does not want to run the risk that the Court of First Instance will begin to assess on its merits the allegations made by Natal.
Once the appeal was filed, Hernandez argued that the maximum forum should not be extended long before a conclusion is reached.
“I have not seen that (dilate) has been the case in cases of a similar nature. In any case, this will affect in one way or another the executions of a mayor in office and the possibility of altering normalcy. today, given the possibility that it could change the scenario, “said the former candidate for governor for the extinct Sovereign Union Movement.
Hernandez did not rule out that, if the Supreme Court issued an adverse decision to Natal, the MVC candidate could try to bring his claim to the ‘ United States Supreme Court, Under the argument that the alleged illegalities curtailed the right to vote of Sant Joan voters.
Natal’s contention alleges that 6,593 “illegal” municipal ballots were counted in the ballot, either because they were votes counted in excess of the number of advanced and absent voters, because they lacked a treatment evidenced in acts of incidents, or because they had no folds.
Romero was certified mayor with an advantage of 3,465 votes, which includes a difference of nearly 6,000 votes over Natal in units 77 of the capital’s five seals, where the early and absent vote was counted.