By Enrique Andrade González

Mexico’s Federal Electoral Tribunal, the TRIFE, today holds in its hands the most critically important decision it has ever had to rule on.

It holds in its hands the destiny of Mexican social peace and stability, in the short-term at least, and today more than the votes cast the outcome lies with the seven magistrates who will determine who is to replace Vicente Fox as President of Mexico on December 1, 2006.

The seven judges have until August 31 to rule, and in the meantime they are, and will be, the most talked about – and intensely pressured – people in Mexico.

The TRIFE magistrates now must interpret the applicable Mexican laws, sift the facts from the suppositions, find the truth, and issue a rightful ruling that will lead to a solution rather than conflict. Together they must democratically figure out the popular majority decision, and that ruling will have to give rise to stability and Mexico’s governance.

Their personal prestige depends on this decision, and that of the institution they represent is on the line. For the judges it is all or nothing.

The Tribunal as a whole, according to law and the Mexican Constitution, is authorized to carryout the final count of the presidential election once it resolves all challenges. And the TRIFE is then empowered to certify the validity of the election, and to officially declare the candidate who received the greatest number of votes President-elect of Mexico.

The lead challenge by the Coalition for the Good of All, which has been filed against local counts listed on tally sheets from District 15 in Mexico City, actually draws in the results of the entire presidential election. Furthermore, it shows violations of the principles of impartiality, equity and conviction in the suit that has been assigned to TRIFE chief magistrate Leonel Castillo González, who must issue an opinion before August 31.

So what might be resolved?

1. The Tribunal could deem that the challenge is without legal foundation, ratify the district counts done by Mexico’s Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), and on this basis declare those results now known valid.

2. Or, in the spirit of conducting a final count and taking into consideration the challenges filed for supposed tampering with tally sheets, the TRIFE could order a new random vote count, or even a total vote by vote re-count.

3. Too, if the TRIFE review does not find in favor of the irregularities charged, and should the results coincide with the tally sheets, the panel could confirm the already completed count and declare the election results valid.

4. However should the TRIFE count show that the inconsistencies charged are true, and the vote by vote results went in favor of the Coalition for the Good of All candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador, his triumph will have to be validated by the Tribunal.

5. If the review and count reveal there were generalized violations of electoral principles by Mexican officials, and that the true results of the election cannot be known, the TRIFE could nullify the July 2 election.

But could Mexico’s presidential election of 2006 really be nullified?

On 17 past occasions, nine following charges submitted by the National Action Party (PAN), the TRIFE has so ordered in non-presidential elections due to a generalized violation of the principles of legality, equity and conviction in the electoral process. But too, the magistrates must respect other principles that govern their proceedings, including:

1. The presumption of validity of the election, excepting when there are serious situations that make the process untenable.

2. Priority protection of the regular functioning of public powers, so that only in extreme cases can decisions be made that have as a consequence the non-integration of the federal executive or legislative powers.

3. The elections are invalid only when the irregularities involved are determinant on the outcome of the same, making support impossible.

So now it seems reasonable to expect the Tribunal, as a first step, to mandate some type of a new vote count according to the options within its jurisdiction to order, and for the results of that count to determine the next step.

What has already been shown however is that there were irregularities in the counting of ballots, and on the vote tally sheets. As well, there is now a social movement that is questioning the process, and social disorder could grow in Mexico as a result of this election.

——————————

Enrique Andrade, a Mexico City-based attorney and business consultant, writes a weekly column for MexiData.info. He can be reached via e-mail at enriqueag@andradep.com.