ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL RECEIVES FIRST TRANCHE OF

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 MEXICO 003865

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/11/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR MX
SUBJECT: ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL RECEIVES FIRST TRANCHE OF
COMPLAINTS

REF: MEXICO 3422

Classified By: ACTING POLITICAL CHIEF ALAN MELTZER, REASONS: 1.4(B/D).


1. (C) Summary: On July 11, poloffs met with the head of
public relations for the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal
Judicial Power (TEPJF) to discuss the legal challenges to the
presidential election results brought by PRD candidate Andres
Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO). Although as of the time of our
meeting Diaz had not yet seen the complaints and could not
comment on them specifically, he did describe the procedure
the TEPJF will follow in adjudicating them. He emphasized
that magistrates have considerable discretion in crafting a
resolution, although complainants must first show there is
reason to believe there was an irregularity in a particular
precinct or district. Although non-commital, Diaz seemed to
believe that the PRD would have a difficult time meeting this
burden in enough electoral precincts or districts to reverse
the election results. End summary.


2. (C) On July 11, poloffs met with Jose Jacinto Diaz
Carega, head of public relations for the TEPJF, to discuss
the process by which the Tribunal will consider and resolve
the complaints filed against the presidential election
results. As of the time of our meeting, the TEPJF had not
yet received the complaints and Diaz therefore was unable to
comment upon them specifically, focusing instead on the
procedure by which the TEPJF would review and decide them.
Later in the day, the press reported that the first tranche
of 355 complaints had been delivered to the TEPJF; these
complaints reportedly consisted of 225 submitted by the
PRD-led Coalition for the Benefit of Everyone, 129 submitted
by Felipe Calderon's National Action Party, and one submitted
by the PRI-led Alliance for Mexico.

The Process Before the Tribunal
--------------


3. (U) Our contact explained that political parties must
submit their complaints to the corresponding Federal
Electoral Institute (IFE) district council within 4 days of
the completion of the final district count. Once a complaint
is submitted to the district council, the council must post
it publicly for 72 hours, during which time other political
parties are permitted, as interested third parties, to submit
an intervention supporting or refuting the complaint. At the
conclusion of this 3-day period, the district council has 24
hours to submit to the TEPJF the original complaint, its
response thereto, and any third party interventions. Based
upon this timeframe, we understand that all complaints must
be delivered to the TEPJF by IFE district councils no later
than Friday, July 14.


4. (U) As complaints arrive at the TEPJF, they are assigned
on a rotational basis to one of the seven magistrates. Each
magistrate studies the complaints assigned to him/her and
prepares a proposed resolution. All seven magistrates then
meet in a public session to discuss and decide on a
resolution of each complaint; decisions are made by a
majority vote. To increase the transparency of the process,
some or all of the magistrates' sessions may be televised.


5. (U) Our contact explained that parties can challenge the
results in individual precincts or in entire electoral
districts, which typically consist of hundreds of precincts.
He noted, however, that individual precincts can only be
challenged where the party's Election Day representative in
the precinct registered a protest on the precinct's tally
sheet; if the party representative signed the precinct's
tally sheet without protest on Election Day, a challenge
cannot subsequently be filed against the results from that
precinct. A party nevertheless retains the right to protest
the results in the electoral district in which the precinct
is located.

Magistrates Enjoy Broad Discretion
--------------


6. (C) Diaz emphasized that the complaints presented a case
of first impression, as the TEPJF had never before received
complaints in a contested presidential election. He
explained that the law accorded the magistrates considerable
discretion in deciding cases and that it was therefore
difficult to predict how they would rule. Nevertheless,
noting that the magistrates likely would not order the
recount of precincts or districts unless the challenger had

MEXICO 00003865 002 OF 002


established reason to believe there was an irregularity, he
implied that the challengers faced a fairly high burden of
proof. (Note: In a June 2006 meeting (reftel),the
magistrates assured poloffs that one remedy they were very
unlikely to apply was the annulment of the entire
presidential election. End note.)


7. (C) Diaz was unable to confirm a press report suggesting
the PRD may have filed an additional legal challenge with the
Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). He noted that although the
SCJ had jurisdiction over constitutional issues, it did not
have jurisdiction over electoral issues. He emphasized that
the TEPJF has the final word on all election-related
challenges, and that its decisions may not be appealed. He
closed the meeting by telling us that due to the
confidentiality rules governing the TEPJF, he would not be

SIPDIS
able to meet with us again while this case was pending.

Comment: Seeking a Solomonesque Solution?
--------------


8. (C) Diaz observed that while the PRD may have been
well-prepared to defend an electoral victory, it appeared to
have been poorly prepared to demand a recount in the event of
its defeat. We understood him to mean that if the PRD indeed
believed that widespread irregularities had occurred, it
would have been well-advised to protest the results in
individual precincts on Election Day. That the magistrates
have considerable discretion in deciding these cases raises
the possibility that they may seek to craft a resolution that
takes the middle ground, such as by ordering a significant,
but partial, recount. Doing so could restore the integrity
of the election in public eyes and perhaps take the wind out
of the sails of all but AMLO's most strident supporters,
without creating the difficult precedent that a complete
recount would set.


Visit Mexico City's Classified Web Site at
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/mexicocity

GARZA