A day after the popular candidate, Ismael “Titi” Rodríguez Ramos, Would take possession from the mayorship of Guánica, the Supreme Court confirmed the sentences he had issued on Court of First Instance in favor of the allegations of Edgardo Creu Vélez, Who campaigned as a direct nominee.
In short, the Supreme Court, by decision 7-1, decided that the president of the State Election Commission (EEC), Francisco Rosado Colomer, Had the power to draw up a list of variations of the name of Creu Vélez that would be awarded to it and that the EEC itself is obliged to award all votes that include any of these variations, even if the ‘voter did not mark the rectangle that accompanies the direct nomination column.
The court opinion, written by the associate judge Erick Kolthoff Caraballo, It essentially implies that the EEC will have to open the briefcases of regular schools and face-to-face advanced voting to identify ballots containing the name of Creu Vélez but not the mark in the rectangle.
It also implies in all probability that both Rodríguez Ramos and the other party candidates will be deprived of votes, as the electronic voting machines would have identified as full votes ballots in which the voter intended to cast. a mixed vote.
According to the results published on the EEC portal, Rodríguez Ramos was awarded 2,386 votes and the former mayor Santos “Papichy” Seda, From’ New Progressive Party, 2,332. While appeals were being made to Superior Judge Anthony Cuevas, the EEC certified that 2,335 votes had been awarded to Creu Vélez, with the possibility that the figure would increase once additional ballots were evaluated.
The EEC portal reflects that the direct nomination column received 2,362 votes, but does not detail how many are for Creu Vélez.
Last week, the PNP election commissioner, Hector Joaquin Sanchez, He publicly argued that if the Supreme Court upheld the first-instance decision, Creu Vélez would rise with victory by a minimal margin.
The presiding judge Maite Oronoz and the associate judge Luis Estrella Martínez issued opinions of conformity, while the associate Angel Colom Perez issue a concurrent opinion.
Only the associate judge Rafael Martínez Torres to issue a dissenting opinion, arguing that candidates were only entitled to challenge the result of the ballot once a winner was certified. In this regard, he noted that the Supreme Court had to reject the certification of appeals to bring them directly before its consideration.